tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-27380668759906612932017-07-27T16:43:49.438-07:00The Vaccine MachineUnplugging America from the Vaccination MatrixRobert Schecterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17592918924115887297noreply@blogger.comBlogger84125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2738066875990661293.post-14176788084646907942015-04-15T16:39:00.002-07:002015-08-17T18:04:58.413-07:00Not a fan of Pan<div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />At a recent hearing on SB277 State Senator Block asked if the CDC or AMA had data about the probability or likelihood of large or huge outbreaks occurring if a certain number of children remained unvaccinated. The answer, based on what history tells us, is that at current rates we are well protected: outbreaks are currently rare rare and huge ones are unheard of.<br /><br />Measles was considered eradicated* nation-wide (eradicated meaning any small outbreaks that occurred over that time frame resulted from imported cases) with rates lower than or about equal to what we have in California today under current laws in place. 2015 MMR vaccination rate in California is 92.6%<br /><br />2001-08 nation-wide vaccination rates for MMR from CDC Pink Book 12th edition<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">2001 - 91.4<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal">2002 - 91.6<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal">2003 - 93.0<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal">2004 - 93.0<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal">2005 - 91.5<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal">2006 - 92.4<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal">2007 - 92.3<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal">2008 - 92.1<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">There were clusters of lower immunity throughout this period just as there have always been and are today<br /><!--[if !supportLineBreakNewLine]--><br /><!--[endif]--><o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal">As to what would happen if this bill passed, there is no metric allowing us to foresee a future with a one or two percent increase in vaccination rates. Historically a 1-3% fluctuation in national rates has occurred randomly from year to year with no demonstrable effect on the number of cases. <br /><br />One would need a well-funded, peer-reviewed study to even begin to try to measure the impact of &nbsp;a small increase in vaccination rates. Anything Senator Pan could produce in a matter of days would be nothing more than a guess. I don’t think we want to pass a bad bill on a guess.<br /><!--[if !supportLineBreakNewLine]--><br /><!--[endif]--><o:p></o:p></div><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">*****<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">Senator Pan keeps talking about things getting worse because we are not stopping the curve of increasing exemptions. But as he well knows, exemptions are no longer rising. Exemptions fell 20% last year and they fell even more dramatically in the clusters of under-vaccination he so often refers to. This is a result of his own bill - AB 2109 - which passed in 2012. The L.A Times reports:<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://www.latimes.com/local/california/la-me-immunization-data-20150123-story.html">http://www.latimes.com/local/california/la-me-immunization-data-20150123-story.html</a><o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal">“Statewide, the rate of vaccine waivers for kindergartners entering school in the fall declined to 2.5% in 2014 from 3.1% in 2013. Bigger declines were seen in districts with some of the larger vaccine exemption rates.<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">In the Santa Monica-Malibu Unified School District, the rate fell from 14.8% to 11.5%; Capistrano Unified in south Orange County declined from 9.5% to 8.6%; Beverly Hills Unified declined from 11.9% to 5%; and Laguna Beach Unified declined from 15.1% to 2%, according to The Times' analysis.”<br /><!--[if !supportLineBreakNewLine]--><br /><!--[endif]--><o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal">The last two areas mentioned achieved astonishingly large drops in exemptions. With Beverly Hills exemptions falling 54% to and those in Laguna Beach falling 86%<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">Overall MMR vaccination rates are stable and at or near record highs<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">*****<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">Almost 7% of children are admitted to school without vaccines on a conditional basis. These children are far more numerous than those who have personal belief exemptions. This bill does not address those conditional exemptions<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">According to press reports:<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal">"These students may lawfully enter kindergarten on a “conditional basis,” with some, but not all, of their required shots. The condition is that they’ll get up to date soon."<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://blogs.kqed.org/stateofhealth/2015/02/02/not-just-un-vaccinated-under-vaccination-also-a-problem-statewide/">http://blogs.kqed.org/stateofhealth/2015/02/02/not-just-un-vaccinated-under-vaccination-also-a-problem-statewide/</a><o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">This is another reason eliminating the personal exemption will have almost no practical effect on measles risks<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">*****<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />Senators Marty Block and Loni Hancock asked:<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">Q: If my child is vaccinated and another is not, what are the chances my child will get the measles<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">A: Since there is a 90% chance transmission would occur if the child were not vaccinated, and the vaccine is 99% effective your &nbsp;vaccinated child's odds of getting the measles would be less than 1%<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">Sources:<br /><!--[if !supportLineBreakNewLine]--><br /><!--[endif]--><o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal">“Measles is so contagious that if one person has it, 90% of the people close to that person who are not immune will also become infected.”<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://www.cdc.gov/measles/about/transmission.html">http://www.cdc.gov/measles/about/transmission.html</a><o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/pubs/pinkbook/meas.html?hc_location=ufi" target="_blank">http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/pubs/pinkbook/meas.html</a><br />“Studies indicate that, if the first dose is administered no earlier than the first birthday, greater than 99% of persons who receive two doses of measles vaccine develop serologic evidence of measles immunity”<o:p></o:p></div>Robert Schecterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17592918924115887297noreply@blogger.com6tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2738066875990661293.post-84734977656265164142015-03-26T09:35:00.001-07:002015-03-29T10:08:25.960-07:00From Disneyland to Fantasyland: The Case against SB 277<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">A bill was recently introduced in the state legislature that would remove all philosophical exemptions to vaccination in the state of California<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">Currently vaccines are mandated for school attendance, however because these vaccine can in some cases be harmful and because many as a matter of conscience or religious conviction object to the practice of injecting their children with dozens of biological agents an exemption process was created <o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">This policy has resulted in very high vaccination rates throughout the state. <o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">Then in late December 2014 a small measles outbreak of about 100 cases began at Disneyland. This led to a hysterical response by the media. Outlets such as the LA Times, CNN and the Sacramento Bee labeled the occurrence a public health crisis. <o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">The public health / pharma / medical establishment seized upon this manufactured crisis to introduce draconian legislation across the nation to end any type of exemption to vaccination laws<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">Numerous fabrications and distortions have been perpetuated by media, public health officials and politicians to create an environment in which this bill could pass. This piece will examine them in detail. &nbsp;&nbsp;<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">Because this law is a fundamental violation of parental rights a broad coalition has emerged to fight these proposed laws<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">I have prepared this document to help you initiate discussions with legislators and to refute the common arguments used to support forced vaccination<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">Finally, this is not an issue about vaccines themselves but an issue of parental choice<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><div style="text-align: center;"><br /></div></div><div class="MsoNormal"><div style="text-align: center;">*****</div></div><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"><br /></div><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: &quot;Rockwell Extra Bold&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;"><b>Why should you oppose this bill if you vaccinate your children?</b><o:p></o:p></span></div><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">Martin Luther King once said, “Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice anywhere.”<br /><!--[if !supportLineBreakNewLine]--></div><br />As more and more freedoms are removed (even the ones you don’t care about) freedom itself will be endangered. Let the process go too far and liberty will go from endangered to extinct. As John Adams once said, “Liberty,&nbsp;once lost, is&nbsp;lost forever."<br /><br /><div style="text-align: center;">*****</div><br /><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: 'Rockwell Extra Bold', serif;"><b><span style="font-size: large;">Specific fantasies being used to support SB 277</span><o:p></o:p></b></span></div><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"><br /></div><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: &quot;Rockwell Extra Bold&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;"><b>The Measles Delusion</b><o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">This delusion says the small measles outbreak that originated at Disneyland was either the result of a plunge in vaccination rates or due to “clusters” of unvaccinated<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">Reality however says rates are at all-time highs and epidemic illnesses have always fluctuated i.e., some very active years, then quiet years then active years again<o:p></o:p></div><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">Nevertheless a “study” has been concocted to allow the media to claim the unvaccinated fueled the outbreak.&nbsp;</div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="text-decoration: none;"><a href="http://archpedi.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=2203906">http://archpedi.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=2203906</a></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">Here’s what the study would have us believe:<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">There are areas where almost no one is vaccinated. They are so large that when the measles arrives in those areas, it uses the large, vulnerable group it finds there as a springboard to attack the rest of the community/state. <o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">This is fantasy. First, as we will see later, these communities are small, rare and still have high vaccination rates, Further the rest of the state is even better protected than are these small areas, so even if the measles left these clusters it would die out quickly – like it actually did.<br /><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">These little clusters (often a cluster can be as small as a family) of under-vaccination didn't “fuel” the outbreak, they were simply affected, to a tiny degree, by an outbreak started when a foreign visitor came into the state. The fact that this outbreak petered out so quickly shows our current laws are working and that the type of extreme legislation now being considered is not necessary.<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">Also important to remember is the measles is a cyclical illness and has its natural ups and downs – cycles such as these can span anywhere from 3-5 years to 20 years. <o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">For example German measles activity in the pre-vaccine era mirrors measles activity over the past twenty years. A peak in 1943, relative quiescence for twenty years and then another peak twenty years later in 1964. <br /><br />In regards to the measles, 1994 saw some 900 cases then lessened activity with a spike of 644 some twenty years later in 2014<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">You cannot blame a cyclical rise in cases on a drop in vaccination rates when those vaccination rates are stable. <o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">And you cannot blame a cyclical rise in cases on a cluster with fewer vaccinated people because these clusters have always existed. There has never been a time when vaccination rates were identical in each and every school or community <o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">We have always had random importation of measles even when measles was “eradicated” This time it was able to spread a little farther than usual because people who go to Disneyland spread out across the state when they return home. This has nothing to do with imaginary low vaccination rates<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">Another factor in measles activity is activity in other parts of the world where measles is prevalent.&nbsp;</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">The Philippines are often implicated For example, Vox.com reports:</div><div class="MsoNormal"><o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal">The real story behind the 2014 outbreak isn't on the West Coast. It's in Ohio Amish country, where a missionary returning from the Philippines turned an otherwise unremarkable year for this virus into one of the <b>worst in recent history</b>.<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://www.vox.com/2015/1/29/7929791/measles-outbreak-2014"><span style="text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;">http://www.vox.com/2015/1/29/7929791/measles-outbreak-2014</span></a><span class="MsoHyperlink"><o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">And the Philippines have been implicated in regards to this year’s Disneyland measles outbreak<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal">http://www.latimes.com/science/sciencenow/la-sci-sn-disneyland-measles-under-vaccination-20150316-story.html#page=1<br /><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">Interestingly immigration from the Philippines has doubled since 1990 going from 900,000 to 1.8 million with 45% of those immigrants living in California. Factors like this, randomness, cyclicality and the fact that this year’s outbreak started in a unique location and not a few vaccine exemptions in a few tiny schools is what explains this year’s measles activity<o:p></o:p></div><br /><div style="text-align: center;">*****</div><br /><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: 'Rockwell Extra Bold', serif;"><b>Eradicated!<o:p></o:p></b></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div>Another fantasy being used to drive SB 277 is the eradication fairy tale. We're told the measles was eradicated in 2000 and is back because of a fall in vaccination rates<br /><br />Here are the problems with yarn. Rates never fell, they are higher today than when the measles was eradicated – measles was eradicated between 2001-08 <br />Further saying an illness is “back” when there are only 150 cases as opposed to the 4 million that used to occur is absurd<br /><br /><div class="MsoNormal">Anyway measles was never really eradicated in the first place. Eradicated just refers to a special public health definition of eradicated which has to do with whether or not cases are home-grown or imported. During the time when the measles was considered “eradicated” there were 557 cases of measles in the USA</div><div class="MsoNormal"><o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://jid.oxfordjournals.org/content/202/10/1520.long"><span style="text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;">http://jid.oxfordjournals.org/content/202/10/1520.long</span></a><o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">Medical news today explains:<br /><br />"It is important to note that "elimination" does not mean that there are zero cases of the illnesses, as some cases occur when people are infected abroad and bring it back to the US, where it can then be transmitted locally.<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal">http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/269819.php<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">But even in years with home-grown measles activity, most cases are still traced to imported cases. For example in 2014 we had 644 cases – the most in two decades – yet:<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal">“Most of the outbreaks reported in 2014 resulted from imported cases spreading in an unvaccinated population.”<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal">http://www.cdc.gov/measles/downloads/matte-think-measles.pdf<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">So this is the fable they are trying to sell us:<br /><br />Measles is eradicated with a 90% vaccination rate. Rates rise to 93% and measles returns because of falling rates which were actually rising rates.<o:p></o:p></div><br /><div style="text-align: center;"><b>*****</b><br /><b><br /></b></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: 'Rockwell Extra Bold', serif;"><b>Measles is dangerous, severe, deadly or potentially deadly.&nbsp;</b></span><br /><span style="font-family: 'Rockwell Extra Bold', serif;"><b><br /></b></span><br /><div style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: 'Rockwell Extra Bold', serif;">No, measles is actually a mild illness</span></div></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">The measles, the illness behind this current vaccination hysteria, is mild and worried few parents in the pre-vaccine era <o:p></o:p><br /><br /><div class="MsoNormal">For most people who get measles, the illness is not serious.&nbsp;</div></div><div class="MsoNormal"><o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://www.sfcdcp.org/measles.html"><span style="color: windowtext; text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;">http://www.sfcdcp.org/measles.html</span></a><o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">“In France, measles is usually considered a mild, rather trivial disease and is no longer dreaded by the general population, physicians, health workers, or health authorities<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/4453052?uid=3739560&amp;uid=2&amp;uid=4&amp;uid=3739256&amp;sid=21103664649467"><span style="color: windowtext; text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;">http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/4453052?uid=3739560&amp;uid=2&amp;uid=4&amp;uid=3739256&amp;sid=21103664649467</span></a><o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><a href="https://books.google.com/books?id=4il2mF7JG1sC&amp;pg=PA533&amp;dq=measles+mild+illness&amp;hl=en&amp;sa=X&amp;ei=yQXwVIm1KYnroATWqoC4Aw&amp;ved=0CDwQ6AEwBDgK#v=onepage&amp;q=measles%20mild%20illness&amp;f=true"><span style="color: windowtext; text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;">https://books.google.com/books?id=4il2mF7JG1sC&amp;pg=PA533&amp;dq=measles+mild+illness&amp;hl=en&amp;sa=X&amp;ei=yQXwVIm1KYnroATWqoC4Aw&amp;ved=0CDwQ6AEwBDgK#v=onepage&amp;q=measles%20mild%20illness&amp;f=true</span></a><o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal">The measles is normally a mild illness<o:p></o:p><br /><br />Finally from the Encyclopedia of Family Health<br /><div class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://bit.ly/1Iav8Rq">measles…is usually mild and harmless</a><br /><br /></div></div><div class="MsoNormal">How does the vaccine establishment try to overcome this basic reality? <o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">They use mortality numbers from third world countries so the illness looks serious. But the living conditions in the third world are what determine severity not the illnesses itself so comparing America with Pakistan is absurd<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"><b>30% complications<o:p></o:p></b></div><div class="MsoNormal">They talk about a 30% “complication” rate but the majority of those complications are conditions few parents see as serious. Diarrhea and ear aches are the two most frequent complications<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">It is only in reported cases that we find 30% complications. Since the measles is mild many cases have historically been underreported. It may be that it is only in the more serious cases that these 30% rates of complications occur. In the milder, unreported cases they could be much lower<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"><b>Encephalitis<o:p></o:p></b></div><div class="MsoNormal">The CDC reports:<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />“1-1,000 cases of measles results in swelling of the brain i.e., encephalitis.” <o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">Sounds scary but most cases of encephalitis are mild:&nbsp; <o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">“Most cases of encephalitis are mild and don't last long.”<br /><a href="http://umm.edu/health/medical/altmed/condition/viral-encephalitis"><span style="text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;">http://umm.edu/health/medical/altmed/condition/viral-encephalitis</span></a><o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"><b>Pneumonia<o:p></o:p></b></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />Again the CDC states:<br /><br />1-20 cases of measles results in pneumonia<b><o:p></o:p></b></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">But again this complication is usually mild not serious:<br /><br />“Most cases of viral pneumonia are mild and get better without treatment within 1&nbsp;to 3 weeks.”<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/ency/article/000073.htm"><span style="text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;">http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/ency/article/000073.htm</span></a><o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"><b>Hospitalization</b><o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal">They talk about hospitalizations but hospitalization says nothing about severity unless we know why it occurred<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">Hospitalization is very likely overdone today. In the pre-vaccine era there were 4 million cases and 48,000 hospitalizations <o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal">Today up to 20% of all cases are hospitalized. This is likely a result of over-cautiousness. <o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">Regardless, if we don’t know why a child is hospitalized, it tells us nothing about the severity of the illness – for example many are hospitalized just to get IV fluids to treat diarrhea<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"><b>Mental Retardation / brain damage<o:p></o:p></b></div><div class="MsoNormal">Numbers on these conditions are taken from data as far back as 1916 when substandard living conditions made children more vulnerable to the virus. As such these numbers are irrelevant to today’s discussion<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"><b>Blindness and deafness<o:p></o:p></b></div><div class="MsoNormal">Both were extremely rare, if not virtually unheard of, in America<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"><b><span style="background: white; mso-bidi-font-family: &quot;Courier New&quot;; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;">The media often erroneously reports Measles kills 1 or 2 per 1,000 infected<o:p></o:p></span></b></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="background: white; mso-bidi-font-family: &quot;Courier New&quot;; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;">Director of the<span class="apple-converted-space">&nbsp;</span></span><a href="http://umriskcenter.org/" title="Risk Science Center"><span style="background: white; color: windowtext; mso-bidi-font-family: &quot;Courier New&quot;; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt; text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;">Risk Science Center</span></a><span class="apple-converted-space"><span style="background: white; mso-bidi-font-family: &quot;Courier New&quot;; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;">&nbsp;</span></span><span style="background: white; mso-bidi-font-family: &quot;Courier New&quot;; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;">at the University of Michigan School of Public Health debunks idea that measles kills 1-2 out of 1,000<br /></span><a href="http://ieet.org/index.php/IEET/more/maynard20150205"><span style="background: white; color: windowtext; mso-bidi-font-family: &quot;Courier New&quot;; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt; text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;">http://ieet.org/index.php/IEET/more/maynard20150205</span></a><span style="background: white; mso-bidi-font-family: &quot;Courier New&quot;; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;"><o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; mso-line-height-alt: 11.7pt;">He states<br /><br />“Yet from the available evidence, claiming&nbsp;that one or two children out of every 1,000 infected in the current US outbreak will die seems far fetched.<o:p></o:p></div><br /><div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; mso-line-height-alt: 11.7pt;">Sadly,&nbsp;using this mortality rate to hammer home the importance of getting kids vaccinated&nbsp;could well&nbsp;backfire. &nbsp;Like myself, many parents from my generation haven’t seen evidence for such a high chance of dying from the disease. &nbsp;And to use data that not only feel wrong, but are not backed up with evidence, only serves to undermines trust in public health experts.”<o:p></o:p></div><br /><div style="text-align: center;">*****</div><br /><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: &quot;Rockwell Extra Bold&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;"><b>General Misinformation</b><o:p></o:p></span></div><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /><div style="text-align: center;"><b>Serious Diseases</b></div><div style="text-align: center;"><b><br /></b></div>The extremist group “Vaccinate California” claims on its website:<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal">The diseases that vaccines prevent, however, are extremely serious.&nbsp; <o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">While I don’t have time to go through each illness to say such illnesses such as rotavirus, mumps, chickenpox and the flu are serious in children is just plain silly. But since most of the current discussion centers on pertussis and the measles. We have seen why the measles is far from serious and will learn the truth about pertussis shortly. We’ll also take a look at polio since no vaccine debate is can occur without mention of polio<o:p></o:p></div><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"><br /></div><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: 'Rockwell Extra Bold', serif;">****<span style="color: red;"><o:p></o:p></span></span></div><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"><br /></div><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><b>Exemptions are skyrocketing </b></span><span style="font-family: Rockwell Extra Bold, serif; font-size: 14pt;"><o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">By referring to a small numerical increase in statistical terms, data can be presented in such a way as to distort the true meaning of those numbers. For example if you are a car salesman and you sell one car one month then double your production and sell two cars the next month, you’re still not selling very many cars and will likely lose your job. <o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">The same tactic is used when talking about vaccine exemptions: a small numerical rise looks large in statistical terms but because the starting point is so low even a large statistical increase is meaningless when considering how many children go to school in the state. For example today 13,000 children out of 500,000 get a personal belief exemption<o:p></o:p></div><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><b>A small numerical increase in exemptions does not mean that</b> <b>increase will continue <o:p></o:p></b></div><div class="MsoNormal">When increases in exemptions are discussed those increases have occurred over the last 10-15 years. The last 10-15 years have been unique in the sense that the internet came about offering people a less well-controlled image of vaccinations and numerous stories appeared postulating a connection between autism and vaccines – it is likely that those who were susceptible to these messages have been reached and exemptions will fall naturally or remain stable at low levels – in California AB2109 - a 2012 bill to force parents to hear a doctor lecture on the miracle of vaccination - has led to large statistical decreases in vaccine exemptions especially in the so-called clusters of low vaccine acceptance (more on clusters later). (Also important to remember is these areas of low vaccination are actually areas of high vaccination, for example Marin county has a 88% vaccination rate for MMR. Only an overwrought public health official would think and 88% vaccination rate is low. Calling such areas poorly vaccinated is just politically motivated spin.<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">Marin rates <o:p></o:p></div><br /><div class="MsoNormal">http://www.cdph.ca.gov/programs/immunize/Documents/2014-15%20CA%20Kindergarten%20Immunization%20Assessment.pdf<o:p></o:p></div><br /><div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: &quot;Rockwell Extra Bold&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;"><b>Vaccination Rates Are Plummeting</b><o:p></o:p></span></div><br /><div class="MsoNormal">More exemptions do not translate into “plummeting rates.” Exemptions are still tiny and are not large enough to overcome activity in the rest of the population. Increases in other areas or groups have more than made up for a few thousand more exemptions.&nbsp;<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div style="text-align: center;">*****</div><div style="text-align: center;"><br /></div><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: &quot;Rockwell Extra Bold&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;"><b>Clusters</b><o:p></o:p></span></div><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: &quot;Rockwell Extra Bold&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;"><b><br /></b></span></div><div class="MsoNormal">Since vaccination rates ARE at all-time highs the establishment had to invent the idea that, because there are areas where rates are lower than in the rest of the state, germs can use these areas to return and ravage the nation. This is the unvaccinated cluster argument.<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">It was invented to make it seem as if there were a problem where there isn’t and to blame the blameless (those who don’t vaccinate) for random fluctuations of infectious illnesses<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><b>Little clusters<o:p></o:p></b></div><div class="MsoNormal">A “cluster” can be any size and for some prominent public health officials it is as small as one family<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">The media, when trying to hype this argument, finds the most dramatic statistic it can find but this means looking for tiny areas. For example they try to make us think one tiny school with only 13 kids making up the kindergarten class will determine fate of state of almost 40 million people<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2015/02/california-least-vaccinated-schools-waldorf"><span style="text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;">http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2015/02/california-least-vaccinated-schools-waldorf</span></a><o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">Here’s an example of the San Fran Chronicle and a public health official using tiny groups as “clusters”<br /><!--[if !supportLineBreakNewLine]--><br /><!--[endif]--><o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal">“Those cases&nbsp;—&nbsp;often contained to a well-defined group, like a religious group or <b>a single family</b>&nbsp;—were relatively simple to track and control. Now, though, <b>dozens of those clusters</b>have been popping up all at once, in multiple counties, and often in people who have no obvious connection to Disneyland.<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal">Forty people are known to have contracted measles at the Disney theme park in December. Then they all returned home, where many of them infected others in their family, school, church or day care.”<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal">http://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/article/Failure-to-vaccinate-fueled-state-s-measles-6121401.php<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">Finally a 2012 bill AB 2109 has led to a <b>plunge</b> in exemptions in so-called clusters – so there is no need for new legislation – <o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">*See AB2109 is working for more on declining exemptions in “clusters”<br /><br /></div><div style="text-align: center;"><b>*****</b><span style="color: red; font-family: 'Rockwell Extra Bold', serif;">&nbsp;</span><br /><span style="color: red; font-family: 'Rockwell Extra Bold', serif;"><br /></span><br /><div align="center" class="MsoNormal"><b>Vaccines only work if everyone is vaccinated<o:p></o:p></b></div><div align="center" class="MsoNormal"><b><br /></b></div><div class="MsoNormal"></div><div style="text-align: left;">This is one of the more absurd claims floating around. It refers not to vaccination but a very high level of coverage that creates what is known as herd immunity. If everyone in a community is vaccinated, germs will have a hard time finding someone they can infect and will not be able to transmit themselves to those few who aren’t vaccinated. That’s herd immunity.&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: left;">Even without the 95% vaccination rate needed to generate this so-called herd immunity, there are still amazingly few cases of illnesses such as the measles because the vaccine is 99% effective and 99% of the population can get it.</div><o:p></o:p><br /><div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;">In California about 93% are vaccinated against measles making it very hard for the illness to transmit itself<o:p></o:p></div><div style="text-align: left;"><b><br /></b></div></div><div style="text-align: center;"><o:p></o:p>*****</div><br /><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: 'Rockwell Extra Bold', serif;"><b>Pertussis Outbreaks are the fault of the unvaccinated</b><span style="color: #0070c0;"><o:p></o:p></span></span></div><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: 'Rockwell Extra Bold', serif;"><b><br /></b></span></div><div class="MsoNormal">One senator expressed her position on SB 277 in a letter to a constituent this way:<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">“In 2012, the U.S. had its biggest whooping cough epidemic since 1955. Nearly 50,000 Americans contracted the disease, which caused 20 deaths – mostly infants under three months. These increases coincided with plunging vaccination rates.”<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">Likely a disingenuous public health official gave her this info, but it is wrong because first as we said earlier, rates have not “plunged”<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">Second correlation does not equal causation. In other words because one thing happens then something else happens does not mean the first thing caused the second thing. For example the iPhone 6 was released right before oil prices fell but the iPhone’s release did not cause oil prices to fall<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">It is widely known in the scientific community that the reason for an increase in pertussis cases is a bad vaccine and more aggressive reporting. Reports of it having to do with low vaccination rates are erroneous, irresponsible and agenda-driven<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://www.internalmedicinenews.com/news/conference-news/infectious-diseases-society-of-america-conference/single-article/acellular-pertussis-vaccine-s-waning-immunity-caused-california-epidemic/71de9826f4.html"><span style="color: windowtext; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt; text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;">http://www.internalmedicinenews.com/news/conference-news/infectious-diseases-society-of-america-conference/single-article/acellular-pertussis-vaccine-s-waning-immunity-caused-california-epidemic/71de9826f4.html</span></a><o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal">BOSTON – The acellular pertussis vaccine’s failure to deliver durable infection protection to children aged 7-10 years led to the 2010 California pertussis epidemic, and prompted infectious diseases experts to question the current schedule of childhood pertussis vaccination.<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">The Sacramento Bee reported:<br />“In Elk Grove, for example, a high rate of school children are vaccinated, yet whooping cough ripped through the Sacramento suburb last year, an <a href="http://www.sacbee.com/news/local/health-and-medicine/article9528275.html" target="_blank"><span style="color: windowtext; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt; text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;">analysis by The Sacramento Bee&nbsp;</span></a>found. Doctors said the reason is that the whooping cough vaccine now in use is often wearing off after two to three years. An older whooping cough vaccine worked better but is no longer used because, in a very small percentage of children, it caused extreme reactions, including high fever and seizures.”<o:p></o:p></div><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"></div><div class="MsoNormal">http://www.sacbee.com/news/local/health-and-medicine/article9528275.html<o:p></o:p></div><br /><div style="text-align: center;"><b>*****</b></div><br /><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: 'Rockwell Extra Bold', serif;"><b>Recent Pertussis Outbreaks are the fault of the unvaccinated II</b><span style="color: #0070c0;"><o:p></o:p></span></span></div><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: 'Rockwell Extra Bold', serif;"><b><br /></b></span></div><div class="MsoNormal">One study was manufactured by a member of the vaccine establishment to try to connect vaccination rates to a return of pertussis to provide cover for the vaccine agenda but the results of the study do not say what its adherents claim they do. <br /><a href="http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/early/2013/09/24/peds.2013-0878.abstract"><span style="color: windowtext; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt; text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;">http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/early/2013/09/24/peds.2013-0878.abstract</span></a><o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />In a nutshell the study says that a few small areas with slightly lower vaccination rates have more pertussis and therefore the pertussis from these small areas drove recent state-wide epidemics. <br /><br />The problem is the study confuses cause and effect – The communities did not cause the outbreak, the communities were affected by the outbreak caused by a bad vaccine <o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">Because the overwhelming majority of Californians are vaccinated and in recent outbreaks over 80% of those diagnosed with pertussis were fully vaccinated, it is preposterous to say these small areas with slightly lower vaccination rates drove statewide activity when so many in the state are vaccinated<br /><a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/04/03/us-whoopingcough-idUSBRE8320TM20120403"><span style="color: windowtext; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt; text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;">http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/04/03/us-whoopingcough-idUSBRE8320TM20120403</span></a><o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">Finally, in adults and older children the disease is less often diagnosed so there are 100s of thousands of additional cases in the nation each year drowning out whatever small activity occurs in small areas described in the study we’re discussing<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />“These data suggest that there are between 800 000 and 3.3 million cases per year in the United States.”<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://facweb.northseattle.edu/csheridan/Bio100Win13/epidemiology%20of%20pertussis%20Pediatrics%20paper%202005.pdf"><span style="color: windowtext; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt; text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;">http://facweb.northseattle.edu/csheridan/Bio100Win13/epidemiology%20of%20pertussis%20Pediatrics%20paper%202005.pdf</span></a><o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"><b>In other words<o:p></o:p></b></div><div class="MsoNormal">As result of a poor vaccine an outbreak resulted and this outbreak impacted a few small areas with slightly lower vaccination rates <o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><br /><div class="MsoNormal">So many more people are vaccinated that a little more activity coming from a small pocket unlikely to do much on a state-wide basis<br /><br /></div><div style="text-align: center;">*****&nbsp;</div><br /><o:p></o:p> <br /><div class="MsoNormal"><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"><b>More on Pertussis<o:p></o:p></b></div><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"><br /></div><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"><b>Vaccine prevention may lead to infection at an inopportune time due to the short term protection it provides in relation to natural infection<o:p></o:p></b></div><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">Preventing a mild infection with a vaccine that does not last long during childhood may result in an infection at a time where the organism may use a new mother to transmit itself to a newborn<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22111856" title="Expert review of clinical pharmacology."><span style="color: windowtext; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt; text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;">Expert Rev Clin Pharmacol.</span></a>&nbsp;2011 Nov;4(6):705-11. doi: 10.1586/ecp.11.55.<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal">Is adolescent pertussis vaccination preferable to natural booster infections?<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal">It is an open question as to what extent boosters should be offered to older age groups or if natural infections would be preferable. On the one hand, circulating B. pertussis may be hazardous to the youngest unvaccinated infants. On the other hand, subclinical natural boosters might be beneficial to population immunity. As the duration of immunity is shorter after vaccination than after natural infections, an unwanted consequence of adolescent boosters might shift the infection peak to older child-bearing adults.&nbsp;<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"><b>More problems with the vaccine<o:p></o:p></b></div><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"><b><br /></b></div><div class="MsoNormal">*“The research suggests that while the vaccine may keep people from getting sick, it doesn’t prevent them from spreading<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://discovermagazine.com/2013/march/15-broken-vaccine"><span style="mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt; text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;">http://discovermagazine.com/2013/march/15-broken-vaccine</span></a><o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 10.0pt;">&nbsp;</span><span style="font-size: 10pt;">&nbsp;</span></div><div class="MsoNormal">*Whooping cough is also caused by para pertussis. The pertussis vaccine may increase susceptibility to parapertussis <o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal">Thus, we conclude that aP vaccination interferes with the optimal clearance of&nbsp;B. parapertussis and enhances the performance of this pathogen. Our data raise the possibility that widespread aP vaccination can create hosts more susceptible to&nbsp;B. parapertussis&nbsp;infection.<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal">http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/277/1690/2017.short<o:p></o:p></div><br /><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"><b>Pertussis Is Generally Mild</b></div><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://www.bmj.com/content/310/6975/299" target="_blank"><i><span style="color: windowtext; mso-bidi-font-family: &quot;Courier New&quot;; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt; text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;">http://www.bmj.com/content/310/6975/299</span></i></a><i><br />Most cases of whooping cough are relatively mild. Such cases are difficult to diagnose without a high index of suspicion because doctors are unlikely to hear the characteristic cough, which may be the only symptom printed<o:p></o:p></i></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">Tozzi A, Ravà L, Ciofi degli Atti M, Salmaso S. Clinical presentation of pertussis in unvaccinated and vaccinated children in the first six years of life.&nbsp;Pediatrics&nbsp;[serial online]. November 2003;112(5):1069-1075. <o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal">Besides the typical symptoms, complications and hospitalizations were rare in our cohort. A study conducted in the United Kingdom also suggests that the disease is much less severe than suggested by textbook descriptions or parents’ fears. <o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">Sweden gave up on pertussis vaccination for 17 years and deaths were almost unheard of<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://www.folkhalsomyndigheten.se/pagefiles/14856/pertussis-surveillance%20in-sweden-thirteen-year-report.pdf"><span style="color: windowtext; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt; text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;">http://www.folkhalsomyndigheten.se/pagefiles/14856/pertussis-surveillance%20in-sweden-thirteen-year-report.pdf</span></a><o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><br /><div class="MsoNormal">In infants pertussis can be very serious but cases in that group are quite rare. Only about 2,000 infants out of 4 million births contract pertussis in an average year.<br /><br /></div><div style="text-align: center;">*****</div><br /><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: &quot;Rockwell Extra Bold&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;"><b><span style="font-size: large;">The fundamental argument against SB 277:&nbsp;</span></b></span></div><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: &quot;Rockwell Extra Bold&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;"><b><span style="font-size: large;">Our Children, Our Choice</span></b><o:p></o:p></span></div><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">Will you or the politicians and bureaucrats raise your child? This bill will force parents to allow unwanted medical treatments to be performed on their children&nbsp;</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /><b>Excuses for allowing them to do this:<br /><!--[if !supportLineBreakNewLine]--><br /><!--[endif]--><o:p></o:p></b></div><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: &quot;Rockwell Extra Bold&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;"><b>Affecting, endangering and spreading</b><o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><b>From the San Fran board of supervisors<o:p></o:p></b></div><div class="MsoNormal">On Tuesday, the Board of Supervisors unanimously passed my resolution putting San Francisco on record in support of the state legislation (SB 277) eliminating the "personal belief" exemption to the vaccine requirement for children.<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal">While we all respect personal choice when it comes to raising children, <b><span style="color: red;">that choice hits a boundary when it impacts the health of other people. Not vaccinating a child puts other people at risk.</span></b><span style="color: #000099;"> </span>Some children are too young to be vaccinated, others have health problems that make vaccination impossible, and vaccination isn't 100% effective (for example, the measles vaccine is 95% effective). It's important for children to be vaccinated and to develop "herd immunity."<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"><b>Our reply<o:p></o:p></b></div><div class="MsoNormal">Not vaccinating is a non-action and therefore impacts no one - you have to do something to impact something.<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">After making this argument you may hear:<br /><br />“What about not feeding a baby, doesn’t that affect the baby? <br /><br />No, when you don’t feed your baby you fail to affect/take care of it when you have a responsibility to take care of it because you brought it into the world. In regards to vaccination, you have assumed no obligation to vaccinate for the benefit of others. <o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">Here is the same argument phrased a little differently with a similar response:<br /><!--[if !supportLineBreakNewLine]--><br /><!--[endif]--><o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal">“However, when it comes to vaccines, the impact of one’s decision to not vaccinate is not confined to that person – it affects the greater community by putting neighbors, including children, at risk of being infected with preventable diseases.”<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">-Not vaccinating is a non-action. In other words you don’t do anything when you don’t vaccinate. If you don’t do anything, you can’t impact or affect anything. Additionally doing nothing puts no one at risk. The risk already exists or there would be nothing to vaccinate against<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">As to the second argument from the San Fran board of supervisors that not-vaccinating puts people at risk:<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">People don’t put other people in danger by doing nothing<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal">After all if the risk were not already there, there would be nothing to vaccinate against. <o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><br /><div class="MsoNormal">There would also be nothing from which to protect those few who can't &nbsp;get vaccinated<o:p></o:p></div><br /><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"><b>But you don’t have the right to spread illnesses<o:p></o:p></b></div><br /><div class="MsoNormal">Being unvaccinated isn’t spreading an illness. I did not get a flu shot this year yet I am not spreading the flu”<o:p></o:p></div><br /><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"><b>Choices for others<o:p></o:p></b></div><br /><div class="MsoNormal">You can make a choice not to vaccinate but that is making a choice for others – like I’m choosing that you become ill when I don’t vaccinate. This is absurd. The only choice I am making is to not risk my child’s health so you don’t get sick – I am choosing to not protect you from that which is already in the world<span style="color: #c00000;"><o:p></o:p></span></div><br /><div style="text-align: center;">*****</div><o:p></o:p><br /><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"><b>You don’t have a right to endanger the public health<o:p></o:p></b></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><b>Public health is not the public’s health<o:p></o:p></b></div><div class="MsoNormal">In the context of this debate, public health simply means a state bureaucrat uses your child as an object to protect someone else. Because using innocent people is never right, the public health argument in regards to forced vaccination fails&nbsp; <o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">As such not vaccinating cannot endanger public health because “public heath” emerges from the participation of people and not participating in an effort isn’t hurting that effort<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><br /><div class="MsoNormal">And as we covered before, not vaccinating does not put anyone’s health at risk so endangering the public health and public’s health arguments both fail<br /><br /></div><div style="text-align: center;"><b>*****</b></div><br /><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"><b>It’s Just for School<o:p></o:p></b></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">No, it is forcing medical treatments on innocent people – school is just a mechanism to hide that fact<o:p></o:p></div><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">If you force kids to go to school [compulsory education laws] and you force them to get vaccinated to go to school [mandatory vaccination laws] you are forcing kids to get vaccinated<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"></div><div style="text-align: center;"><br /></div><br /><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: &quot;Rockwell Extra Bold&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;"><span style="font-size: large;"><b>Additional arguments against SB 277</b></span><o:p></o:p></span></div><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"></div><div style="text-align: center;"><b>No cost benefit analysis</b></div>We have been given no idea of what impact this law will have on cases and serious cases in the immunocompromised. All we hear are vague platitudes about protecting the public health <o:p></o:p><br /><div class="MsoNormal">There is no data, independent or otherwise, on serious cases that will be averted<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"></div><div style="text-align: center;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: center;">*****</div><br /><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"><b>Other Western democracies do not force medical treatments on their citizens</b></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">Western democracies such as Canada, Australia, Japan and Western Europe have no vaccine-related school laws and all those who do provide philosophical exemptions<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">When compulsory vaccination was raised in England the British Medical Association had this to say:<br /><!--[if !supportLineBreakNewLine]--><br /><!--[endif]--><o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal">"The doctor-patient relationship is based on trust, choice and openness and we think introducing compulsory vaccination may be harmful to this."<br /><a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-186604/Doctors-say-compulsory-vaccines.html"><span style="text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;">http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-186604/Doctors-say-compulsory-vaccines.html</span></a><o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">Now there are some countries that do have laws similar to SB 277. For example Pakistan arrests parents who don’t vaccinate their children. They only difference between us and them is they don’t use school to hide their rejection of basic human rights <o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">SB 277 incompatible with western values<br /><br /><div style="text-align: center;">*****</div><br /><o:p></o:p> <br /><div style="text-align: center;"><b>A race to the bottom</b></div><br /><div class="MsoNormal">If this bill passes, California will join Mississippi and West Virginia as the only other two states with such extreme vaccination laws in place<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">Interestingly West Virginia and Mississippi are 2 of the 5 unhealthiest states in the nation and the 2 states with the lowest income and education levels in America<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_by_income"><span style="color: windowtext; text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_by_income</span></a><o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://www.businessinsider.com/these-are-the-10-unhealthiest-states-in-the-us-2013-12"><span style="color: windowtext; text-decoration: none;">http://www.businessinsider.com/these-are-the-10-unhealthiest-states-in-the-us-2013-12</span></a><o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal">http://www.foxbusiness.com/personal-finance/2012/10/15/americas-best-and-worst-educated-states/</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">When I moved from NY to California 25 years ago it was known as the Mecca of healthy living – now, if this law passed it will be seen as a bastion of backwardness and totalitarianism<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><br /><div class="MsoNormal">On the other hand, progressive blue states such as Washington and Oregon have recently rejected legislation similar to SB 277<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">*****</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"><br /></div></div><div class="MsoNormal"><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"><b><span style="background: white; font-family: 'Rockwell Extra Bold', serif;">AB2109 is working – there is no need for more extreme legislation</span></b><b><span style="color: #c00000; font-size: 14.0pt; mso-effects-shadow-align: none; mso-effects-shadow-alpha: 65.0%; mso-effects-shadow-angledirection: 5400000; mso-effects-shadow-anglekx: 0; mso-effects-shadow-angleky: 0; mso-effects-shadow-color: black; mso-effects-shadow-dpidistance: 3.4pt; mso-effects-shadow-dpiradius: 5.5pt; mso-effects-shadow-pctsx: 0%; mso-effects-shadow-pctsy: 0%; mso-style-textfill-fill-gradientfill-shade-linearshade-angle: 5400000; mso-style-textfill-fill-gradientfill-shade-linearshade-fscaled: no; mso-style-textfill-fill-gradientfill-shadetype: linear; mso-style-textfill-fill-gradientfill-stoplist: &quot;0 \#A54200 9 100000 shade=20000 satm=200000\,78000 \#FF8C19 9 100000 tint=90000 shade=89000 satm=220000\,100000 \#FFF1E9 9 100000 tint=12000 satm=255000&quot;; mso-style-textfill-type: gradient; mso-style-textoutline-outlinestyle-align: center; mso-style-textoutline-outlinestyle-compound: simple; mso-style-textoutline-outlinestyle-dash: solid; mso-style-textoutline-outlinestyle-dpiwidth: .075pt; mso-style-textoutline-outlinestyle-join: round; mso-style-textoutline-outlinestyle-linecap: flat; mso-style-textoutline-outlinestyle-pctmiterlimit: 0%; mso-style-textoutline-type: none;"><o:p></o:p></span></b></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /><a href="http://www.latimes.com/local/california/la-me-immunization-data-20150123-story.html"><span style="color: windowtext; text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;">http://www.latimes.com/local/california/la-me-immunization-data-20150123-story.html</span></a><o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal">Statewide, the rate of vaccine waivers for kindergartners entering school in the fall declined to 2.5% in 2014 from 3.1% in 2013. Bigger declines were seen in districts with some of the larger vaccine exemption rates.<o:p></o:p></div><br /><div class="MsoNormal">In the Santa Monica-Malibu Unified School District, the rate fell from 14.8% to 11.5%; Capistrano Unified in south Orange County declined from 9.5% to 8.6%; Beverly Hills Unified declined from 11.9% to 5%; and Laguna Beach Unified declined from 15.1% to 2%, according to The Times' analysis.<br /><br /><o:p></o:p></div><div style="text-align: center;">*****<br /><br /></div><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: 'Rockwell Extra Bold', serif;"><b>The hypocritical doctors supporting this bill believe in exemptions for themselves,&nbsp;</b></span></div><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: 'Rockwell Extra Bold', serif;"><b>not our children</b><span style="color: #c00000;"><o:p></o:p></span></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">These are the people around the immunocompromised<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://www.ama-assn.org/ama/pub/physician-resources/medical-ethics/code-medical-ethics/opinion9133.page"><span style="color: windowtext; text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;">http://www.ama-assn.org/ama/pub/physician-resources/medical-ethics/code-medical-ethics/opinion9133.page</span></a><o:p></o:p></div><div style="text-align: center;"></div><div class="MsoNormal">physicians have an obligation to:&nbsp; (a) Accept immunization absent a recognized medical, religious, or philosophic reason to not be immunized.<br /><!--[if !supportLineBreakNewLine]--><br /><!--[endif]--><o:p></o:p></div><div style="text-align: center;">*****<br /><br /><b>The price</b></div><div class="MsoNormal">Getting that last 1% requires the most draconian measures, undermines our values and provides the least benefit<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">If this misguided law passes, thousands of innocent families will be hurt.<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">Creating an absolutely sterile world has high costs<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">How will a mother of a vaccine injured child feel knowing she cannot protect younger siblings from the procedure that injured her older child<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">13,000 kids getting unwanted vaccines for 20 years&nbsp;<o:p></o:p></div><div style="text-align: center;"><br />*****<br /><br /><div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;"></div><div style="text-align: center;"><b>Slippery Slope</b></div><br /><div style="text-align: left;">Senator Pan got his bill (AB 2109) &nbsp;forcing parent to listen to a doctor’s lecture before getting an exemption. This bill worked very well cutting exemptions dramatically especially in the so-called pockets of under-vaccination. Was senator Pan happy? Of course not, now he’s pushing an even more extreme piece of legislation. One can only imagine what happens if this misguided law goes through<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"></div><div style="text-align: left;">The next logical step will be to mandate yearly flu shots, adding as many as 22 new shots to the schedule. (This year the flu shot had an effectiveness of 12%.)&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: left;">Additionally each and every one of the dozens of vaccines in development will be quietly added to the current schedule</div><br /><o:p></o:p> <br /><div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;">Before you know it kids will be getting 100-150 doses of vaccine to feed the insatiable desires of the public health establishment<o:p></o:p></div><br /><div class="MsoNormal"></div><div style="text-align: left;">Sound crazy? – We’re already up to around 69 doses by 18 – add in flu shots from daycare to college and we get to 91</div><!--[if !supportLineBreakNewLine]--><br /><!--[endif]--><o:p></o:p><br /><div class="MsoNormal"><b style="font-family: 'Rockwell Extra Bold', serif;"><span style="font-size: large;">SB 277 addresses a problem that does not exist</span></b></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"><b>Only 2.5% of kindergarteners have personal belief exemptions. </b><o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;">A PBE only means a child has opted out of as few as one vaccine - not all the vaccines. For example a parent may be skeptical of a birth dose of hepatitis b vaccine – an injection for a sexual transmitted disease a child has little chance of contracting and opt out of that particular vaccine but get all the rest. <o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;">Almost 7% of children are admitted to school without vaccines on a conditional basis. These children are far more numerous than those who have personal belief exemptions. This bill does not address those conditional exemptions<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;">According to press reports:<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;">"These students may lawfully enter kindergarten on a “conditional basis,” with some, but not all, of their required shots. The condition is that they’ll get up to date soon."<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;"><a href="http://blogs.kqed.org/stateofhealth/2015/02/02/not-just-un-vaccinated-under-vaccination-also-a-problem-statewide/"><span style="text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;">http://blogs.kqed.org/stateofhealth/2015/02/02/not-just-un-vaccinated-under-vaccination-also-a-problem-statewide/</span></a><o:p></o:p></div><br /><div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;">So this is another reason eliminating the personal exemption will have almost no practical effect<o:p></o:p></div><div style="text-align: left;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: left;"><br /></div><div align="center" class="MsoNormal"><b>Lessons from the "outbreak"<o:p></o:p></b></div><div align="center" class="MsoNormal"><b>Is this outbreak a Harbinger of things to come or worst that can happen?<o:p></o:p></b></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"></div><div style="text-align: left;">We just did an experiment – a foreign traveler came to Disneyland with a case of the measles. Because Disneyland is a hub that brings people from all over the state together, one would expect that an infection there could travel all over the state as people went back to their neighborhoods – that is if vaccination protection had been eroded to the degree the vaccine alarmists would have us believe</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: left;">Not surprisingly the high vaccination rates and the current vaccination laws we have in place stopped this small outbreak quickly?&nbsp;</div><br /><div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;">The measles did not run wild through so-called clusters of under-vaccination<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;">Very high rates made it virtually impossible for the highly contagious, but generally mild, illness to spread. Within a few months the tiny outbreak had exhausted itself<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: left;"></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;">A highly contagious illness in the perfect location were the perfect condition for such a highly contagious virus but due to current laws in place the illness died out quickly&nbsp;<o:p></o:p></div></div><div style="text-align: center;"><div style="text-align: left;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: center;"><b>The non-problem is solving itself</b></div></div><div style="text-align: center;"><div style="text-align: left;"><br /></div></div><div style="text-align: center;"><div class="MsoNormal"></div><div style="text-align: left;">From news reports:</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: left;">“Receptionists at Kaiser Permanente now ask families about measles symptoms when they make appointments, says physician Nam Lam, assistant chief of pediatrics at Kaiser Permanente Orange County.”</div><o:p></o:p><br /><div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;">“At the Westchester Medical Center in Los Angeles, receptionists tell patients with measles symptoms to meet staff at the office's back entrance, to avoid infecting others, pediatrician Amy Shapiro says.”<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;">“In the past, Shapiro had to work to persuade some parents to vaccinate their children on time. Now, so many parents are asking for the measles vaccine that she nearly ran out of shots.”<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: left;"></div><div class="MsoNormal"></div><div style="text-align: left;">Hearing of just a 100 cases, many parents ran to their doctor to vaccinate. Because of self-regulating mechanisms such as this we will never see the number of measles cases the doomsayers fear and any small outbreak will end long before serious consequences can emerge.&nbsp;</div><br /><br /><div style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: large;"><b>Safety Concerns</b></span></div><!--[endif]--><o:p></o:p></div><div style="text-align: center;"><div style="text-align: left;"><br /></div></div><div style="text-align: center;"><div style="text-align: left;">You can’t force medical treatments on people – there are risks involved – you can’t impose risks on other people’s children</div></div><div style="text-align: center;"><div style="text-align: left;"><div class="MsoNormal"><o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: &quot;Rockwell Extra Bold&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;; mso-fareast-font-family: &quot;Times New Roman&quot;;">Vaccines have always had problems.&nbsp;</span>The only questions are what will the next problem be and how will you feel having forced vaccines on the unwilling when that problem occurs?</div><div class="MsoNormal"><o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">These incidents all occurred as vaccines were being declared safe by the scientific community<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">In the 1940’s the yellow fever vaccine was contaminated with hepatitis B. It was given to US servicemen. The result was 300,000 became infected and 60 were killed<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal">Vaccinated by Dr. Paul Offit / Smithsonian Books / Page 40<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">In the 1950s a vaccine made with a supposedly killed polio virus contained live polio. According to Wikipedia, “40,000 developed&nbsp;<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poliomyelitis#Classification" title="Poliomyelitis"><span style="text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;">abortive poliomyelitis</span></a>&nbsp;(a form of the disease that does not involve the&nbsp;<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_nervous_system" title="Central nervous system"><span style="text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;">central nervous system</span></a>), 56 developed paralytic poliomyelitis—and of these, five children died from polio”<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">In the 1960’s contamination of the polio vaccine with a possibly carcinogenic simian virus was discovered <o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">In the late 60s’ / 1970s many children developed a more serious form of the measles when exposed to the virus. This was a result of their being vaccinated with an early version of a measles vaccine. Because of this the vaccine had to be taken off the market<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">In 1976 the CDC orchestrated the vaccination of some 50 million Americans on the pretext that a swine flu epidemic was at hand. The epidemic never emerged and, because of those vaccinations, 500 people are believed to have contracted Guillain-Barre syndrome.<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">In the 1990s it was discovered that the vaccine schedule was exposing children to excess levels of mercury. Soon thereafter mercury was removed from most vaccines<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">In 2001 it was reported<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal">Sunday Express April 1, 2001<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal">“UP to two million children were knowingly put at risk by the former Government with a vaccine which causes meningitis. The MMR jab, known as the Urabe strain, was still approved by Tory ministers for two years after some children developed a form of meningitis after receiving it.”<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><br /><div class="MsoNormal">With the 100’s of new vaccines in the pipeline, can we really expect another one of these incidents will not occur?<o:p></o:p></div></div></div><div style="text-align: center;"><div style="text-align: left;"><br /></div></div><div style="text-align: center;"><div style="text-align: left;"><div style="text-align: center;">*****</div></div></div><div style="text-align: center;"><div style="text-align: left;"><br /></div></div><div style="text-align: center;"><div style="text-align: left;"><div align="center" style="background: white; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0in; text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><b>A Broken System</b><o:p></o:p></span></div><div align="center" style="background: white; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0in; text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div><div style="background: white; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0in;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Part of the argument used to justify compulsory vaccination is that if a child is required to take a vaccine, a system will be in place to compensate that child should a resultant injury occur. <o:p></o:p></span></div><div style="background: white; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0in;"><br /></div><div style="background: white; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0in;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Today the system that is supposed to do that is broken</span><span style="font-family: Courier New;"><o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">Let’s look at the system we have. The basic premise is parents can’t sue vaccine makers if something goes wrong because the government wants to protect them from being sued out of business<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">As a result a special vaccine court shielding drug companies from potential suits was established in 1986. This system is not working.<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">According to the New York Times:<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">“Lawmakers designed vaccine court to favor payouts, but the government fights legitimate claims and fails its obligation to publicize the court, worried that if they concede a vaccine caused harm, the public will react by skipping shots.”&nbsp;<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2014/12/22/us/politics/ap-us-vaccine-court.html?_r=0"><span style="color: windowtext; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt; text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;">http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2014/12/22/us/politics/ap-us-vaccine-court.html?_r=0</span></a><span class="MsoHyperlink"><span style="color: windowtext;"><o:p></o:p></span></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">Yet despite government efforts to hide this compensation program, the Sacramento Bee reports, “Last year, the trust fund paid out more than $202 million to people who claimed they or their children were injured or killed by a vaccine covered by the program. A government table lists the kinds of injuries for which people can seek compensation: anaphylactic shock, brain disorders, paralysis, chronic arthritis.<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/article10311497.html#storylink=cpy"><span style="color: windowtext; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt; text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;">http://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/article10311497.html#storylink=cpy</span></a><b><o:p></o:p></b></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">We can only imagine how much more would be paid out if the system was working as designed. <o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">Finally Justices Sotomayor and Bader-Ginsburg recently weighed in on the issue opining that our current system does not ensure vaccine safety<b><o:p></o:p></b></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">In a recent decision shielding pharmaceutical companies from vaccine-related lawsuits, Justice Sandra Sotomayor, joined by <a href="http://www.forbes.com/profile/ruth-bader-ginsburg" target="_blank"><span style="color: windowtext; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt; text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;">Ruth Bader Ginsburg</span></a>, wrote in the dissent that the ruling created, “a regulatory vacuum in which no one ensures that vaccine manufacturers adequately take account of scientific and technological advancements when designing or distributing their products.<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/23/business/23bizcourt.html"><span style="color: windowtext; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt; text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;">http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/23/business/23bizcourt.html</span></a><span class="MsoHyperlink"><span style="color: windowtext;"><o:p></o:p></span></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span class="MsoHyperlink">With children being denied the ability to get fair compensation, the idea of passing a law to force vaccines on them becomes even more distasteful<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span class="MsoHyperlink"><br /></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: &quot;Rockwell Extra Bold&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;"><b>*****</b></span></div><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: 'Rockwell Extra Bold', serif;"><br /></span></div><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: 'Rockwell Extra Bold', serif;"><b>Vaccine injuries are real</b></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">Ask your legislator how he or she would you feel if you were the one that forced these kids to get the vaccines that led to these injuries?<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><a href="https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=1048011541880699"><span style="text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;">https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=1048011541880699</span></a><br /><br /><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R80GCrXLdvo"><span style="text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R80GCrXLdvo</span></a><o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><span class="MsoHyperlink"> </span><br /><div class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://www.charlotteobserver.com/living/health-family/article11620775.html"><span style="text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;">http://www.charlotteobserver.com/living/health-family/article11620775.html</span></a><o:p></o:p></div></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span class="MsoHyperlink"><br /></span></div></div></div><div style="text-align: center;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: center;"><b style="font-family: 'Rockwell Extra Bold', serif;"><span style="font-size: large;">More bad arguments for SB 277</span></b></div><b style="font-family: 'Rockwell Extra Bold', serif; text-align: center;"><br /></b><br /><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"><b>We force people to wear seat belts<o:p></o:p></b></div><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"><b><br /></b></div><div class="MsoNormal">Responses can either be:<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />Let’s stick to merits of law at hand<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">Or<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">22 years (this includes college mandated vaccines) of being injected with biological agents is very different from buckling a seatbelt for a few years<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">Same approach can be taken to similar arguments such as we make people pay taxes, buy car insurance etc.&nbsp;<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">*****</div><b style="font-family: 'Rockwell Extra Bold', serif; text-align: center;"><br /></b><br /><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"><b><span style="font-family: inherit;">Vaccines have saved millions of lives</span></b><b><span style="font-size: 10.0pt;"><o:p></o:p></span></b></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">Regardless the “vaccines save millions of lives” argument has nothing to do with this bill<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">We will have vaccines without this bill. Only 2.5% of children have an exemption to as few as one vaccine. Less than 1% of children have received no vaccines<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"><o:p>*****</o:p></div><b style="font-family: 'Rockwell Extra Bold', serif; text-align: center;"><br /></b><br /><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"><b>Parents should not have to worry when they go in public<o:p></o:p></b></div><div class="MsoNormal">They have no reason to worry. Almost all of them can vaccinate and there are almost no cases of the measles with current laws in place. <o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">*****</div><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"><br /></div><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"><b>These diseases are not gone<o:p></o:p></b></div><div class="MsoNormal">Correct, in some countries there are many cases of the measles. However with current laws in place, they are rare in America. Since illnesses such as the measles are incredibly well-controlled based on the laws we have in place, SB 277 is unnecessary and talk of diseases “not being gone” is irrelevant to this conversation</div><div style="text-align: center;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: center;">*****</div><br /><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"><b>The science says…<span style="font-size: 10pt;"><o:p></o:p></span></b></div><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"><b><br /></b></div><div class="MsoNormal">You may hear a quote like this used to excuse forced vaccination: <b>“Science shows that vaccines are the best and safest way to protect everyone from potentially deadly diseases.”<br /></b><br />First, this bill isn’t about the merits of vaccination rather it is about a parent’s right to decide on what medical treatments their children will receive. <o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">Before I go one I’d like to point out another tactic used in this “science” argument. <o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">Those pushing vaccines talk about one issue: science showing this or that, but in the process smuggle in a false concept to support the vaccination argument. In this case notice how “potentially deadly diseases” is smuggled into the conversation when the illnesses they are alluding to are generally mild or problematic largely as a result of poor living conditions.<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">As to science, science does not override a parent’s decision on raising their children unless an extreme situation arises such as withholding life-saving treatments from a child ill with cancer. The vaccination of healthy children in no way compares to that<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">One example of what life would be like in a science dictatorship: forced breastfeeding. After all there are scientific studies saying it’s better for the baby, so we’d have to do what science thinks best. <o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><b>“The science is indeed clear that vaccinations have dramatically reduced diseases that were once widely feared.”<o:p></o:p></b></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">Irrelevant. <o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">Do you want to live in a world where the government can force you to do whatever science says?<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">In America, you’re free not to obey “the science.”<o:p></o:p><br /><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"></div><div style="text-align: center;">*****</div><br /><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: &quot;Rockwell Extra Bold&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;"><b>We have to protect the public health / safety</b><o:p></o:p></span></div><div style="text-align: center;"><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;">The public is very well protected right now<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;">This really means we have to use some children to protect other children who are already incredibly well-protected. You have no right to use other people’s children as objects to satisfy your goals or desires<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;">Government protects rights as well. This bill not only fails to protect those rights; it blatantly violates them<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;">Total security comes at a high price. As President Eisenhower<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;">Said, “If you want total security, go to prison. There you're fed, clothed, given medical care and so on. The only thing lacking... is freedom.”<o:p></o:p></div></div><div class="MsoNormal"></div><div style="text-align: center;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: center;">*****</div><br /><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: &quot;Rockwell Extra Bold&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;"><b>We have to protect the babies and the immunocompromised because they depend on us</b><o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">We all want to help vulnerable people when we can, but that help must be voluntary. As much as we feel for someone with a poor immune system their health issues do not place obligations on others&nbsp;<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">Fortunately with the laws in place the immune-compromised are incredibly well protected. This year’s 100 or so measles cases in California were the highest number in decades. It is likely we will not see this many cases for years to come<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">There are few people who cannot get vaccinated due to immune issues – the most widely cited group are children getting chemotherapy but they are few in number – additionally they are often not in school while undergoing treatment and can resume vaccination shortly after treatment<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">As to those permanently unable to vaccine there are only about 900 kindergarteners each year qualify for a permanent medical exemption<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">California has 58 counties and 915 exemptions which equals 15 medical exemptions per county<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"><b>The immunocompromised have tremendous protection right now<o:p></o:p></b></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">*The same rates and laws that “eradicated” the measles is in place today<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">*Children without vaccines are asked to leave school if there is even one case of a mild illness – this gives the compromised children tremendous protection<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">*Doctors who treat the immunocompromised a quitting on their non-vaccinating patients in greater numbers so there is one less opportunity for an encounter in a waiting room or doctor’s office<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"><b>Measles Babies<o:p></o:p></b></div><div class="MsoNormal">Before vaccination maternal antibodies protected babies for 6 months to a year – now due to compulsory vaccination the antibodies mothers pass along last a far shorter period of time. In essence vaccination has made babies more vulnerable to measles but it also has made measles very rare so babies are still at a very tiny risk of catching measles. Concerned parents can of course keep these children at home where they are not exposed to as many germs as they would be in daycare<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"><b>Pertussis babies<o:p></o:p></b></div><div class="MsoNormal">Richard Pan uses this excuse<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal">“A pregnant woman catches&nbsp;whooping cough&nbsp;from an unimmunized child, then transmits it to her newborn child after delivery.”<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">While this is rare [2,000 cases 4million births .0005%] there is a chance<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">Luckily soon-to-be mothers have the option of vaccinating during pregnancy: a process the medical profession says will protect the baby during infancy. <o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"><b>Parents of the immune compromised<o:p></o:p></b></div><div class="MsoNormal">A few parents have called for the elimination of vaccine exemptions so their child’s level of protection will be increased. <o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">I’m not sure this is something all parents who have immunocompromised children would do. <o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">I certainly could not bring myself to force other people to get vaccine after vaccine just for my own child’s benefit<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"><b>Parental trust<o:p></o:p></b></div><div class="MsoNormal">Parents don’t own their children; they have a trust over those children based on the fact that they brought them into the world. Most parents feel part of that trust means doing what is best for their children. <br /><br />If parents feel vaccines are not in the best interests of their child, those parent will not in good conscience, no matter how much they would like to help a less fortunate child, be able to allow her child to be used as an object for the benefit of others. <br /><br />Those parents can sacrifice themselves but are not in a position to sacrifice their child <o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"><b>No data<o:p></o:p></b></div><div class="MsoNormal">There is no metric as to how many people must be vaccinated with how many vaccines to make an impact on the safety of a single immunocompromised child. We are being asked to sacrifice but no information exists as to what real impact that sacrifice will have<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">I were a parent, I’d accept the tiny risk of a world that rejects forced vaccination so my immune-compromised children will be able to raise their children as they see fit when they become adults&nbsp;<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"></div><div style="text-align: center;"><br /><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"></div><div style="text-align: center;"><b><span style="font-size: large;">General points of interest</span></b></div><b></b><br /><div style="text-align: center;"><b><br /></b></div><b></b><br /><div style="text-align: center;"><b><b>Pan’s petition</b></b></div><b><o:p></o:p></b><br /><div class="MsoNormal"><o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal">Senator Richard Pan is claiming he has a petition signed by 20,000 Californians supporting his misguided bill. This is a fraudulent claim since anyone, real or fake, from anywhere could have signed this moveon.org online petition. I myself had my signature accepted as Ed Muffin from Muffinwood NY.<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"><b>*****</b></div><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: &quot;Rockwell Extra Bold&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;"><b><br /></b></span><span style="font-family: &quot;Rockwell Extra Bold&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;"><b>The Magical Herd</b><o:p></o:p></span></div><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">NPR reports<br />“the vaccination rate in the community has to be very high to guard against measles —&nbsp;<a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22426372"><span style="text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;">96 percent or greater</span></a>”<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2015/03/16/393336901/vaccination-gaps-helped-fuel-disneyland-measles-spread"><span style="text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;">http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2015/03/16/393336901/vaccination-gaps-helped-fuel-disneyland-measles-spread</span></a><o:p></o:p></div><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">What NPR is talking about is herd immunity. Wikipedia describe it this way:<br /><br />&nbsp;“Herd immunity&nbsp;… describes a form of indirect&nbsp;<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immunity_(medical)" title="Immunity (medical)"><span style="text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;">immunity</span></a>&nbsp;that occurs when large percentages of a population have become immune to an infectious disease, thereby providing a measure of protection for individuals who are not immune. In a population in which a large number of individuals are immune, chains of infection are likely to be disrupted, stopping or slowing the spread of disease.<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herd_immunity#cite_note-pmid21427399-2"><span style="text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;">[2]</span></a>&nbsp;The greater the proportion of individuals in a community who are immune, the smaller the probability that those who are not immune will come into contact with an infectious individual”<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">It is false that rates need to be 96% or higher for people to be guarded against measles. People are still guarded and incredibly well protected with today’s vaccination rates. When we eliminated measles the vaccination rate was only 90% and today’s 93% vaccination rate stopped the Disneyland outbreak in its tracks – there were only a little over 100 cases in a state of 38 million&nbsp; <br /><br /><b></b><br /><div style="text-align: center;"><b><b>Herd immunity vs parental rights</b></b></div><b></b><br /><div style="text-align: center;"><br /></div></div><div class="MsoNormal">In America we take rights very seriously. We can all take great pride in our nation's progress in recognizing the rights of women, minorities and workers. History shows California has been in the forefront of this progress, yet SB 277 is a huge step backwards. That's why it is so puzzling to hear that this bill is even being considered: it is an assault on the very concept of rights we hold so dear. <br /><br />Look at it this way: You must violate a parent's rights to get a 96% vaccination rate: achieving rates that high requires state force. On the other hand my not vaccinating violates no one's rights. So naturally, in a system valuing rights, the rights violator would have to give way to the innocent person, yet this bill does is the opposite: it gives precedence to the right violator at the expense of the innocent parent. </div><div class="MsoNormal"><div style="text-align: center;">*****</div><div style="text-align: center;"><br /></div></div><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: &quot;Rockwell Extra Bold&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;"><b>Diane Feinstein</b><o:p></o:p></span><br /><span style="font-family: &quot;Rockwell Extra Bold&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;"><b><br /></b></span></div><div class="MsoNormal">Diane Feinstein wrote this to a constituent defending her support of SB 277. She tries to make it seem without this new law the world would be as it was in 1900 ignoring the current, incredibly safe world we live in in 2015 with the current laws in place<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">Diane writes<br />“Before vaccination became widespread in the United States, tens of thousands of children were seriously disabled or died each year as a result of diseases such as smallpox”<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">Whatever went on before widespread vaccination has absolutely no bearing on the current debate. Here's why:<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">Feinstein’s scenario is not even close to going on now, with the laws we currently have in place the world is almost sterile in regards to the old, mild childhood illnesses. Using a world of 60 years ago to justify attacking parental rights is absurd. The choice is not between these laws and thousands of disabled and death. The choice is between preventing maybe a few dozen cases of generally mild illnesses and a totalitarian system that uses the almost limitless power of the state to force potentially dangerous, unwanted medical treatments on thousands of California children. Feinstein's letter reveals the intellectual bankruptcy and dishonesty of the vaccine extremists and their contemptible agenda<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">They act as if we have no laws today – as a result of the laws we have we have a 93% vaccination rate with only 2.5 percent opting out of even a single vaccine <o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">This bill does not invent vaccination<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">It does not take us from 1900 to the present<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"></div><div class="MsoNormal">It does not stop everyone from stopping vaccination because without the bill almost no one is stopping vaccination<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">*****</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"></div><div style="text-align: center;"><b>Take action today. Contact your legislators and let them know that this bill is:</b></div><br /><br /><div class="MsoNormal">Anti-choice<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal">Anti-parent</div><div class="MsoNormal">Pro-discrimination<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal">Totalitarian<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal">Extreme<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal">Out of touch with American values&nbsp;</div><div class="MsoNormal"><o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">And don't forget, t<span style="font-family: 'Rockwell Extra Bold', serif; text-align: center;">his bill is so extreme it does not even allow for religious exemptions and</span><span style="font-family: 'Rockwell Extra Bold', serif; text-align: center;">&nbsp;it forces vaccines on home-schoolers</span>&nbsp;</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"><o:p>*****</o:p><br /><o:p><br /></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"></div><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: &quot;Rockwell Extra Bold&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;"><b>Coming Soon: What about polio?</b><br /><br />*****<br /><br /><o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><b style="font-family: 'Rockwell Extra Bold', serif; text-align: center;"><br /></b><o:p></o:p></div></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div>Robert Schecterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17592918924115887297noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2738066875990661293.post-48000335368815864692014-06-26T14:21:00.002-07:002014-06-26T14:21:44.191-07:00When Ethicists Attack<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-e3bZ9278BxE/U6yFqElIgNI/AAAAAAAAAaM/aV26waKauv4/s1600/nerd.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-e3bZ9278BxE/U6yFqElIgNI/AAAAAAAAAaM/aV26waKauv4/s1600/nerd.jpg" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div><br /></div>This morning a member of our Facebook page shared with me this the latest <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/to-your-health/wp/2014/06/26/the-ethical-negligence-of-parents-who-refuse-to-vaccinate-their-children/">vile vaccine establishment attack</a> on parents who choose not to vaccinate.<br /><br />The mindless drivel we're about to dismantle was written by a so-called medical ethicist. a Dr. Eric Kodish and appeared in the Washington Post<br /><br />He starts with an unsupported assertion that, “Most parents see <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/as-measles-cases-increase-a-sharp-call-for-vaccinations/2014/05/29/95d0fb5a-df88-11e3-810f-764fe508b82d_story.html">vaccinations as a medical necessity </a>to protect their children” His link provides no support to bolster his claim.<div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div>The doctor then moves on to display an utter lack of historical understanding stating, “The anti-vaccination movement is a relatively new one that has taken hold over the past decade.”<div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: windowtext;">This is only true if 175 years makes something “relatively new.” <a href="http://ocp.hul.harvard.edu/contagion/vaccination.html">A short history of vaccination</a> appearing on <a href="http://harvard.edu/">Harvard.edu</a> reports:</span></div><blockquote class="tr_bq">In the 1840s, the first state-sponsored vaccination campaigns appeared in England and, later, in Germany. </blockquote><br /><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: windowtext;">Mr. </span>Kodish<span style="color: windowtext;"> continues with something about non-vaccination being “based on myths that have been perpetuated by the power of the Internet,” yet lists none of these myths. Perhaps he does not have the knowledge to discern between myth and truth.&nbsp;</span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: windowtext;"><br /></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: windowtext;">Regardless at this point he begins the obligatory</span><span style="color: windowtext;">&nbsp;fear mongering that is a hallmark of pieces such as these with the lament that, “what began as a small movement is now powering a full-blown health crisis.”&nbsp;</span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: windowtext;">But to call ~500 cases of a mild illness in a nation of 300 million a crisis does not make it one. All it does is simply reveal the perpetual state of hysteria in which the vaccine extremist lives. <o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: windowtext;">As to the anti-vaccination movement’s role in these cases, no evidence is provided to support the silly claim the non-vaccinated are “powering” a small rise in measles cases.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: windowtext;">The author may be unaware but measles cases have been fluctuating around a low-level baseline established in the 1990s. <o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: windowtext;">Since vaccination rates remain at all-time highs, changes in USA measles activity are based on other factors: world-wide measles activity for example. <o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: windowtext;">Furthermore, infectious illnesses show cyclical peaks and valleys. But, this alarmism is nothing new: similar spurious claims arise every few years.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: windowtext;">Marching ahead and armed with a seemingly endless supply of fallacious arguments, Mr. Kodish pontificates:</span></div><blockquote class="tr_bq"><span style="color: windowtext;">Some parents believe that vaccinating their children is a decision that only affects them and their families.</span></blockquote><br /><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: windowtext;">Not vaccinating - which is doing nothing -does not affect anyone unless there is a </span>pre<span style="color: windowtext;">-existing obligation to act. In terms of vaccination no such obligation exists.&nbsp;</span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />Progressing to a popular zealot talking point Kodish implies people are obligated to vaccinate because some others can’t. While it is unfortunate some have health issues precluding vaccination, the existence of those issues do not impose obligations on parents to subject their children to a 18-21 years of unnecessary medical treatments. If there was even the slightest argument for such an obligation, I’m sure our intrepid "ethicist" would have presented it. <o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">Unmercifully, the error-laden and logically challenged screed trudges on. Kodish&nbsp;hallucinates:</div><blockquote class="tr_bq"><span style="color: windowtext;">Parents who choose not to vaccinate their children also are putting other peoples’ children at risk along with their own younger children,&nbsp;</span></blockquote><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: windowtext;">More absurdity. The risk to these children already exists or there would be nothing to vaccinate against. Since the risk exists, non vaccination does not create it as a means to “put people at risk”</span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: windowtext;"><br />I cannot believe the Post publishes such child-like arguments. I guess that’s why the mainstream media is such a national laughingstock<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: windowtext;">Undeterred and blissfully unaware that wishful thinking is not a reasoned argument, Kodish plods on with his most ignorant and reprehensible delusion, scrawling:</span></div><blockquote class="tr_bq"><span style="color: windowtext;">They [the unvaccinated] contribute to the loss of innocent lives.</span><span style="color: windowtext;">&nbsp;</span></blockquote><br /><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: windowtext;">But it is painfully obvious that doing nothing, i.e., not vaccinating, does not “contribute” to anything since it is not an action.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: windowtext;">He then, in an out-of-character moves, actually shares a fact that is true: some doctors choose not to care for families who refuse to vaccinate their children.&nbsp;<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: windowtext;">What this reality makes obvious is medicine should have its <a href="http://www.forhealthfreedom.org/Publications/Monopoly/">monopoly</a> over certain aspects of healthcare removed. The profession has been taken over by extremists and it is no longer able to serve the nation’s citizens. Giving it monopoly protection harms the interests of Americans. Introducing competition into healthcare would separate zealots from reasonable healthcare providers and give parents opportunities to deal with practitioners with shared their views on health. <o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: windowtext;"><br />As to the utility of taking healthy children to the doctor for repeated well visits there is no evidence (at least I have been able to find none, and I've looked) the bloated schedule the American Association of Pediatrics has manufactured has any positive impact on health. It is just as likely that they are an opportunity for the type of over treatment that created the antibiotic resistance about which the author speaks.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: windowtext;">Winding down, Kodish continues examining the issue of doctors refusing to treat patients. He talks about doctors&nbsp;“firing” those who don't vaccinate, while failing to realize, since we hired you, all you can do, as our employees, is quit.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: windowtext;">Concluding, he encourages the totalitarian approach that permeates the public health subculture asserting:<o:p></o:p></span></div><blockquote class="tr_bq"><span style="color: windowtext;">Schools must insist that children cannot start kindergarten without being vaccinated. This approach has been phenomenally successful in states such as West Virginia and Mississippi</span></blockquote>Kodish is, for a change, right; forcing vaccines on the unwilling has been phenomenally successful. Phenomenally successful at creating a police state and violating the rights of American citizens. <br /><br />Encouragingly, with the help of that scary old internet so feared by vaccine fundamentalists, more and more people are awakening to the fact they are surrendering their freedom and the freedom to raise their children to an out of control public health establishment. As this awakening continues the house of cards known as compulsory vaccination, will come crumbling down. <br /><br />And I think that's in the process of happening. After all, if the tide were not turning why the need for the constant and increasingly repugnant attacks on parents brought to us by the vaccine establishment and their media collaborators?<br /><div><div class="MsoNormal"> <br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: windowtext;"><br /></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: windowtext;"><br /></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: windowtext;"><br /></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: windowtext;"><br /></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: windowtext;"><br /></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: windowtext;"><br /></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: windowtext;"><br /></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: windowtext;"><br /></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: windowtext;"><br /></span></div></div>Robert Schecterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17592918924115887297noreply@blogger.com6tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2738066875990661293.post-92091166675002253302014-04-22T11:32:00.001-07:002014-04-22T11:33:10.266-07:00Attacking Dissent in Defense of Vaccination<br /><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-ZBC7k4VIBs4/U1au6SKXLWI/AAAAAAAAAZw/iy9MXtBTCdg/s1600/aypes.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-ZBC7k4VIBs4/U1au6SKXLWI/AAAAAAAAAZw/iy9MXtBTCdg/s1600/aypes.jpg" /></a></div><br /><br /><div class="MsoNormal">The media's odd fixation with Jenny McCarthy continues. Last night I came across&nbsp;<a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/22/opinion/bruni-autism-and-the-agitator.html?hp&amp;rref=opinion">this laughable attack</a> on Ms. McCarthy by New York Times writer and vaccine fanboy Frank Bruni. <br /><br />He begins his piece with an unsupportable assertion couched as a question:<br /><br />“What do you call someone who sows misinformation, stokes fear, abets behavior that endangers people’s health” <o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">I don’t know, Frankie. What do YOU call it. It really doesn't matter since the actions you describe are not descriptive of those of Ms. McCarty.&nbsp;<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">The type of speech Ms. McCarthy engaged in endangered no one. If her personal experience dissuaded some from vaccinating, those people simply failed to protect themselves from generally mild illnesses or illnesses for which their children were not at risk. <o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">They did not endanger anyone.<br /><br />Mr. Bruni then raises the entirely irrelevant point that:<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">“Because she posed nude for Playboy”<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">Which is curious since he fails to point out the heroin addiction of Mr. Seth Mnookin - a&nbsp;prominent vaccine evangelist whose talking points are featured prominently in the article</div><div class="MsoNormal"><o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">Mr. Bruni proceeds by sharing Ms. McCarthy’s claim that, “I am surely not going to tell anyone to vaccinate,” which seems to be an unusual claim from someone who is “antivaccine”</div><div class="MsoNormal"><o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">But “antivaccine” is just a meaningless propaganda term parroted by vaccine cheerleaders such as Mr. Bruni in order to stigmatize those who choose to spare their children a lifetime of vaccines.<br /><br />Mr. Bruni continues his nonsense stating:<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">“And on The Huffington Post a year after that,&nbsp;<a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jenny-mccarthy/whos-afraid-of-the-truth_b_490918.html"><span style="color: windowtext;">she responded</span></a>&nbsp;to experts who insisted that vaccines didn’t cause autism and were crucial to public health with this declaration..”<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">As to the claim regarding vaccines and autism, it is important to realize only one vaccine, the MMR, and one vaccine ingredient, thimerosal, has ever been seriously investigated. So how experts would know “vaccines didn’t cause autism” is a mystery. Perhaps they are clairvoyants. <br /><br />As to vaccines being “crucial to public health” I’m sure being able to force vaccines on America’s children is crucial to the vested interests comprising the public health establishment, but it’s certainly not crucial to the health of individual children - the vast majority of whom dealt with mild childhood illnesses quite well before the deluge of vaccines that began in the mid-forties.<br /><br />Mr. Bruni goes on asking:<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">“When did it become O.K. to present gut feelings like hers as something in legitimate competition with real science?”<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">It’s always been O.K. She has a right to free speech as guaranteed by the constitution – you know that founding document so hated by main stream media publications such as The Times<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">He concludes with this:<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">“Are the eyeballs drawn by someone like McCarthy more compelling than public health and truth?”<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><br /><div class="MsoNormal">I don’t know the source of the “truth” about which you speak. Perhaps it’s the science statists revere so deeply. But science, especially science conducted by the very interests dedicated to foisting vaccine after vaccine upon an unsuspecting public, is not the “truth.” Science is a way of investigating the natural world. It’s not “the truth”<o:p></o:p></div>Robert Schecterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17592918924115887297noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2738066875990661293.post-89029303701396405642014-04-10T14:05:00.003-07:002014-04-10T14:33:53.705-07:00USA Today: Manipulation on Display<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-kLQHoFHTIH8/U0btaFIoFnI/AAAAAAAAAZc/_Q9-xq38Nww/s1600/USA.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-kLQHoFHTIH8/U0btaFIoFnI/AAAAAAAAAZc/_Q9-xq38Nww/s1600/USA.jpg" /></a></div><br /><div><br /></div>Here we go again. The mainstream media sinks to a new low in this<a href="http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/04/06/anti-vaccine-movement-is-giving-diseases-a-2nd-life/7007955/?csp=fbfanpage&amp;fb_source=message"> piece of rubbish</a> that, considering the number of professional hucksters quoted, appears to have been written by the vaccine establishment itself. <br /><br />The article, &nbsp;ostensibly written by a one&nbsp;Yamiche Alcindor, gets off to a bad start even before it starts. The inane title “Anti-vaccine movement is giving&nbsp;diseases a 2nd life” foreshadows the manipulation and deception to follow. <br /><div><br /></div>The underlying goal of &nbsp;Ms.&nbsp;Alcindor's&nbsp;article is to make it appear that people are blameworthy or responsible for events&nbsp;that they took no action to cause. To do this the authors attempt to create the false perception that we are doing SOMETHING when we are doing NOTHING.<br /><br />Let's begin our&nbsp;deconstruction&nbsp;of this piece and its assertions with an examination of the title, "giving&nbsp;diseases a 2nd life."<br /><br />Giving second life can be seen in two ways. The first is stopping an action you were already engaged in. For example if I were a boxer winning a match, I could slow my attack and allow my opponent to recover thus giving him a second life. Or I could do something like donate a kidney to someone close to death. One is an action while the other is the cessation of an action. In the case of infectious illnesses, I’m certainly not actively helping the germ as in the kidney analogy. And I’m not pulling back from a vaccination commitment because I’ve never made such a commitment. As such, I think the “giving a second life” claim fails badly. <br /><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div>The piece continues with the shopworn claim that those who become infected without their knowledge are "spreaders, infectors and transmitters."<br /><ul><li>people who carry the bacteria can sometimes transmit it to others, who will in turn become sick.&nbsp;</li></ul><ul><li>Yet as Samantha Purkiss learned, bringing infected people to the emergency department is simply another way to spread disease.&nbsp;</li></ul><ul><li>Schuchat says, the infected spread it in their communities.&nbsp;</li></ul><ul><li>Many might not know they are carrying a disease but can still be contagious and pass it on before symptoms arrive.</li></ul>Germs use people to spread themselves. We do not ACT to spread them. Since the incessant use of the words spread and transmit are employed to create the impression we are to blame for acts of nature or God, it is vital to understand that only actions (or the failure to take actions we’ve voluntarily accepted) justify blame. As such attempts to blame us for being used by another organism against our will and knowledge are ridiculous. Remember, being acted upon is not the same as acting.<br /><div><br /></div><div><div>The article continues it's theme in another form with this charge:</div><blockquote class="tr_bq">people actively choosing not to are helping diseases once largely relegated to the pages of history books — including measles — make a comeback in cities across the nation,</blockquote>“…actively choosing not to??&nbsp;LOL. Looks like they’re trying to make it look like we’re DOING something when were not. Ironic that the people asking us to trust them with our children’s health are so blatantly deceptive.<br /><br />As to the “helping” part, it’s another laughable attempt to make non-actions seems like actions. What did we do to help the germs? Well since we didn’t DO anything, we didn’t do anything to help the germs. It's not a difficult concept to grasp but somehow it seems to elude the vaccine cheerleaders in the media.</div><div><br /></div>Now that we've debunked the clumsy attempts to demonize parents who don't vaccinate, let's move on to the specific cases mentioned in the article and accompanying video. The first case deals with an infant who sadly died of a pertussis infection: a rare outcome in infants - most often those under six months of age. Ms.&nbsp;Alcindor&nbsp;states:<br /><blockquote class="tr_bq">The mother, who was inoculated years before giving birth to Brady, later learned that she could have gotten a booster shot during her pregnancy that likely would have saved Brady's life. </blockquote>Unfortunately, if this mother would have contracted pertussis naturally as a child she would have likely had <a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19876392">30 years to life time immunity</a> to the illness. Her immunity would have protected her child. But, because she was vaccinated with a poor vaccine, she assumed she was protected when she wasn't.<br /><br />It's also odd Ms. Alcindor classifies pertussis as a "vaccine preventable disease" considering the&nbsp;<span style="color: windowtext;">first series of injections does not provide adequate protection until three are given between the ages of 2 and 6 months. After that the vaccine does such a good job of prevention, you need</span><span style="color: windowtext;">&nbsp;booster after booster after booster well into adulthood.</span><br /><div><br /></div><div>As to the actual risks of a baby dying from pertussis, they are tiny. In the United States there are about four million births and around 20 deaths each year. And it is estimated that there are between five hundred thousand to a million cases each year. So the death rate is minuscule. Of course the media only want you to engage your emotions and assume that by seeing the story of a rare death you'll abandon reason and assume this tiny risk is something you should be concerned with. <br /><br />The establishment realizes how they can distort our perceptions with these tactics and is on record encouraging this shameless exploitation of dead or suffering children. Glen Nowak, Director of Communications, Centers for Disease Control, Presentation at the 2004 Vaccine Summit <a href="http://www.ageofautism.com/2008/08/vaccines-concer.html">announced</a>:<br /><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: windowtext;"><o:p></o:p></span></div></div><blockquote class="tr_bq">Vaccination demand...is related to heightened concern, anxiety, and worry. Pictures of children who have died can be particularly motivating</blockquote><div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: windowtext;">It should reassure readers that Sweden, after unacceptable number of reactions associated with the old-whole cell vaccine abandoned pertussis vaccination for seventeen years and deaths were almost non-existent<o:p></o:p></span></div></div><div><br />Continuing, Ms Alcindor then shares the tragic case of Jeremiah Mitchell, a little boy who lost his arms and legs due to an invasive infection that is so rare the CDC does not even recommend those in Jeremiah's age group be vaccinated against it. She opines:<br /><blockquote class="tr_bq">Jeremiah was exposed because someone brought the disease into their community. </blockquote>No Jeremiah was exposed because he went into a germ-filled world. Just like we’re exposed to the cold when we leave our home on a cold day. And no one “brought” it into the community because it IS in the community. According to the <a href="http://www.health.state.mn.us/divs/idepc/diseases/meningococcal/meningitisqa.html">Minnesota Department of Public Health</a>:<br /><blockquote class="tr_bq">At any given time, about 10-15 percent of all people are believed to carry N. meningitis in their throats and nasal passages.</blockquote>She also presents a heartbreaking video of Jeremiah dealing with the aftermath of his illness. It's a harrowing story but one that is extraordinarily rare. But rare occurrences do happen in a nation of over three hundred million people. And if someone wants to draw from all those people and travel back far enough in time, examples to further a particular agenda can be found and communicated to us through video or pictures.<br /><br />But a video or picture, in and of itself, is not an argument to vaccinate or do anything else. That's because a picture appears without context or facts. It does not provide data on actual risks. It does not tell you the circumstances surrounding an illness. It simply attempts to engage the emotions with the hope that those emotions will override reason and create unwarranted fear, turning us into people who can be manipulated and controlled.<br /><br />A picture does not say if the child had an underlying condition most children don't? It does not say it the child was exposed to second-hand smoke -<a href="http://www.biomedcentral.com/presscenter/pressreleases/20121210o"> a risk factor</a> for developing invasive meningococcal disease? And it does not tell us if that child on some medication that made him or her more vulnerable to invasive illness.<br /><br />Pictures presented in such a way only show us what the presenter wants us to see. They don't reveal a deeper picture.<br /><br />Moving away from this tragedy, let's examine some ancillary points made by USA Today and it's team of vaccine shills. Ms. Alcindor writes:<br /><blockquote class="tr_bq">Many continue to believe the debunked idea that vaccines cause autism, while others don't trust the federal government or the pharmaceutical companies responsible for these vaccines. </blockquote>Of course the “idea that vaccines cause autism” hasn’t debunked. It hasn’t even been studied. The only things that have been studied in any serious manner are one vaccine ingredient, thimerosal, and one, that’s right just one vaccine: the MMR. So to say that vaccines have been exonerated as a possible cause of autism is misleading at best and deceitful at worst. As to the author’s apparent surprise that people would be hesitant to trust the government and big pharma, I’d say, based on a long history of untrustworthiness, that distrust is well-earned. <br /><br />She continues with this quote:<br /><blockquote class="tr_bq">In communities across the nation, Americans of all stripes are making dangerous decisions to reschedule or forgo immunization, says Alan Hinman, a scientist who sits on the scientific advisory board of Voices for Vaccines, which supports and advocates for on-time vaccinations. </blockquote>For many of us who have looked at this issue, the dangerous decision is bombarding a child’s developing immune system with vaccine after vaccine in an attempt to, as the experts say, “trick” that system. I’m not tricking the development of a system that either evolved or was created a certain, very specific way to prevent illnesses that are either mild, or that are almost certainly not going to happen to me or my child – like the meningitis case exploited so shamelessly here. You decide what’s dangerous for your family and I’ll decide what’s dangerous for mine, Alan.<br /><div><br /></div><div>Ms. Alcindor then shares this odd opinion:</div><div><blockquote class="tr_bq">The anti-vaccination movement has picked up steam in the past decade with support from celebrities such …reality TV star Kristin Cavallari, who last month said not vaccinating was "the best decision" for her children. </blockquote>The assertion that sharing your own personal vaccination decision on a TV program is analogous to supporting some ill-defined “anti-vaccination movement” is quite bizarre.&nbsp;</div><div><br /></div><div>Alcindor then claims something about pertussis being nearly forgotten when it has in fact been on the<a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10451158"> rise</a> for over twenty years (&nbsp;as a result of a weak vaccine and more aggressive surveillance&nbsp;) and outbreaks of the illness are covered incessantly by the media.<br /><br />So there we have it; another shameless piece of vaccine propaganda taken apart and disposed of. With so many of these articles popping up and regurgitating the same hackneyed talking points, one has to wonder if it &nbsp;is a sign of desperation on the part of the vaccine establishment and their media collaborators. Perhaps they are beginning to sense an awakening talking place among parents across the nation. And because the foundations of the vaccine program are so decrepit, this is an awakening that cannot be allowed to happen<br /><br /></div><br /><br /><br /><br />*For an accurate understanding&nbsp;of measles mortality statistics mentioned in the USA Today article, please refer to t<a href="http://thevaccinemachine.blogspot.com/2014/03/looney-and-beast-deconstructing.html">his pos</a>t.<br /><div><br /></div><div><br /><div><br /></div></div></div>Robert Schecterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17592918924115887297noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2738066875990661293.post-64653667914285036992014-03-24T13:03:00.001-07:002014-03-24T15:56:36.952-07:00New York Times: vaccinating America against liberty<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-e1kQz-WhOSg/UzB_Ber-4hI/AAAAAAAAAZM/9YRrWMG8vS8/s1600/times.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-e1kQz-WhOSg/UzB_Ber-4hI/AAAAAAAAAZM/9YRrWMG8vS8/s1600/times.jpg" /></a></div><br /><br />The media's attack on parental rights continues - this time in the far-left New York Times. Not surprisingly they are leaping upon a bandwagon demonizing non-vaccinating parents and adopting the extremist position that calls for an end to vaccine exemptions.<br /><br />I came across this <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2014/03/23/making-vaccination-mandatory-for-all-children/eliminate-vaccine-exemptions">pathetic editorial </a>as I was checking my news feed today and had to respond.<br /><br />It is written by a one Kristen A. Feemster a pediatric infectious diseases physician and health services researcher at the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia and University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine. In other words a public health do-gooder that has no respect for your rights as a parent. She begins <br /><blockquote class="tr_bq">At the crux of this question is whether individual choice can be subverted for public good</blockquote>First let’s cut through this “public good” facade and expose it for what it is: simply what one group of people want – often at the expense of another group.<br /><br />We have inalienable rights to control what is injected into the bodies of our children and ourselves. There is no debate and there is no balance to be achieved between liberty and some amorphous concept of the common good. Our property right in our own body and our right to raise our own children are self- evident. To overcome such obvious realities requires more than some feeble appeal to common goodism.<br /><div><br /></div><div>She continues:<br /><blockquote class="tr_bq">Personal and religious belief exemptions should be curtailed because some people, whether because of age or compromised immune systems, cannot receive vaccines. They depend on those around them to be protected.</blockquote><div>As to the dependence gambit, no one can force their dependence on others. If someone willingly feels they can help by vaccinating and contributing to herd immunity that is fine, but they cannot be compelled to risk their own heath to satisfy the wants of others<br /><br />Moving on she writes:<br /><blockquote class="tr_bq">Vaccines work by protecting individuals, but their strength really lies in the ability to protect one’s neighbors.</blockquote></div><div><div>The claim that the fundamental benefit of vaccination lies in its ability to create herd immunity is absurd. Herd immunity is an ancillary product of individual vaccination. Since almost everyone can be vaccinated today and since the establishment claims vaccines are effective, only a tiny number "benefit" from herd immunity while thousands must pay the price of a never-ending series of unwanted vaccines to generate it<br /><br />Next are a series of bad analogies meant to justify an even more draconian set of compulsory vaccination than we already have. She states:</div><div><blockquote class="tr_bq">Vaccines aren’t the only situation in which we are asked to care about our neighbors.</blockquote></div>First, there is no asking, there is compulsion backed by state force. Using ask in this context is yet another example of the dishonesty inherent in the vaccine extremist movement. And caring isn't the same as vaccinating. I can care about them without subjecting my child to a lifetime of unwanted medical treatments.<br /><br />Next is the comes the bromide about having to obey traffic laws. (This is a popular one with vaccine fanatics)&nbsp;</div><div><div><br />There are two arguments applicable to this analogy and both do not support your position. If roads were private, it would again be a decision of the road company and its customers as to what would be allowed on private property. If on the other hand you take the position that roads are a legitimate function of government, rules pertaining to the use of those roads would be justified since using such roads in an unsafe way could put other users at risk. The nature of the good – in this case the road – is a function of the rules that manage its use. Without rules it could be argued it would not even be a road since chaos would ensue and the road would turn into a parking lot. Whatever rules put in place cannot however violate fundamental rights since the very purpose of rules is to protect rights. To violate some to protect others would be contradictory.<br /><br />Returning to the road only functioning with rules. This is not the case with vaccines for school - they function quite well without vaccine requirement - and children are not acting to create risks whereas a driver without rules could act to generate risks for others.<br /><br />Screaming children are analogous to your road analogy because that negates the purpose of the institution. Vaccination to attend is not even in the same realm. Flu shots are not mandatory in most schools and those schools function quite well. Same with schools that existed for decades without mandatory vaccination laws. The state cannot punish children by denying the public education they have a right to as a way to force parents to vaccinate them against their will.</div><div><br /></div><div>She then goes on to something about drug tests at work</div><div><br /></div><div>This is a private matter between employer and employee and is not analogous to vaccinations for school. School is a public product and as such children have a right to it without having to medicate themselves to use a service that he or she has a fundamental right to.</div><div><br /></div><div>And finally here examples conclude with this.<br /><blockquote class="tr_bq">paying taxes - these may go against our beliefs and make us bristle, but we ascribe to them because without this shared responsibility, civil society doesn’t work</blockquote>&nbsp;First of all you use "ascribe" incorrectly. Perhaps you meant submit or relent or&nbsp;acquiesce.<br /><br />You have not explained where this “responsibility” comes from so until you do we can dismiss the claim that it exists.<br /><br />Civil society does not work when one group uses state force to confiscate the assets of others through taxes – you seem to be using one immoral act to justify another. Civil society is based on refraining from the use violence against the innocent to achieve your desires at their expense. Voluntary, not coerced actions, are the foundation of a free society.<br /><br />Leaving the analogies behind, &nbsp;she offers an unconvincing argument in an attempt to justify the nation's insidious mandatory vaccination policies.<br /><blockquote class="tr_bq">To justify the subversion of individual choice to public good, there are some conditions that need to be met. The behavior or intervention needs to be safe and effective, and the risk of not participating in the behavior needs to outweigh any risk from the behavior. </blockquote>Absurd. This is simply argument by assertion and a recitation of some shopworn utilitarian claptrap. You are justifying state force and coercion to achieve your goals at the expense of my goals. Just as a common thug would. There is no way you can objectively argue your desires carry more moral weight than the desire of those who do not want to vaccinate. You can’t even state what the concrete “benefits” would be. You are just limited to generalities and feel-good slogans<br /><br />It goes on:<br /><blockquote class="tr_bq">public health community's responsibility to support the health of patients and ensure the health of the communities in which they live. </blockquote>The do-gooder feels they have this responsibility, but neither their own delusions of grandeur not the voters acquiescence&nbsp;grants them the moral right to use state force to exercise this self-serving goal because their actions very often violate the fundamental rights government exists to protect. As a component of the government, public health is constrained to protecting the rights of individuals not their health. People can protect their own health through voluntary means. Only when rights are being violated in, for example, a quarantine situation, can government claim a role.<br /><br />This piece reveals what should be common knowledge: the common gooders that comprise the vaccine establishment are totalitarians at heart. Our liberty is nothing more than an obstacle to them and a such they will, to achieve their own self-serving goals, use any means necessary to subvert that liberty. It's time America wakes up to this fact and rejects the notion that freedom from a few cases of the measles is grounds to surrender the freedom upon which this nation was founded.</div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div>*Correction. This editorial is one of four discussing the issue of vaccine exemptions. Therefore I should have directed my response towards the author of the piece advocating for the abolition of exemptions rather than the paper itself. That having been said, the call to end exemptions is just one step beyond the Times' established position calling for tougher&nbsp;<a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/12/opinion/12thu4.html">restrictions on exemptions</a>.&nbsp;</div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div><br /><br /><br /></div></div></div>Robert Schecterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17592918924115887297noreply@blogger.com6tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2738066875990661293.post-4298325771552851562014-03-15T10:45:00.002-07:002014-03-15T10:45:52.262-07:00Looney and the Beast: deconstructing the ramblings of a vaccine extremist<div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-lJkKOv1_Hnw/UyONiPxAkBI/AAAAAAAAAYg/mMDy8g0tMvA/s1600/!+ue.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-lJkKOv1_Hnw/UyONiPxAkBI/AAAAAAAAAYg/mMDy8g0tMvA/s1600/!+ue.jpg" /></a><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-KO4UbN1-ckc/UyRrGbns4rI/AAAAAAAAAYw/jcXM-7YpJQc/s1600/!+119.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-KO4UbN1-ckc/UyRrGbns4rI/AAAAAAAAAYw/jcXM-7YpJQc/s1600/!+119.jpg" /></a></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: #0070c0;"><br /></span><span style="color: #0070c0;"><br /></span></div>We’ve been getting some requests to respond to <a href="http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/03/13/thanks-anti-vaxxers-you-just-brought-back-measles-in-nyc.html">this piece of trash</a> that recently appeared on the on-line rag, The Daily Beast. <br /><br />It is written by a looney doctor who, like almost all vaccine militants is consumed with bitterness and anger. In a previous screed written for the same rag he snarls, “<a href="http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/01/30/the-real-reason-pediatricians-want-you-to-vaccinate-your-kids.html">vaccinate your kids—or get out of my office</a>!”<br /><br />The piece we’ll examine today is chock full of ignorance, misinformation and abject stupidity.<br /><br />He begins by calling us crazy for not spending our lives going to the doctor for vaccine, after vaccine, after vaccine (many of which are of questionable efficacy) to stop illnesses for which we are either at very low risk or that are generally mild – and, for that matter, almost non-existent. Yet he offers no explanation as to why ours is not the rational choice. <br /><br />He continues by advancing a common tactic of the vaccine extremist: the attempt to demonize and objectify parents by labeling anyone who decides to not lap up as much vaccine as Merck can produce as, not a person, but an “antivaxxxer.”<br /><br />Scapegoating fellow Americans in such a way is of course reprehensible, but because the cult of vaccination has such weak and decrepit arguments to support their position, they have no choice but to attack people rather than defend their own claims.<br /><br />Interestingly this coward has no problem slandering parents while hiding his own name. The name he uses, Russell Saunders, is just a pseudonym for a pediatrician in New England. How pathetic.<br /><br />As to some ridiculous charges included in the article itself. <br /><br />He claims, “those who don’t vaccinate are bringing back the measles.” This is preposterous. Those who don’t vaccinate are not bringing back anything. The measles exists in the world. If it didn't there would be nothing to vaccinate against. There is no bringing back that which is here. Additionally “bringing back” implies an action on our part to actively go out and act in a way to cause the return of an illness. This is laughable. If someone acted to break into a lab where some remaining samples of smallpox were kept, then took those samples onto a train and released them,that would be bringing something back. Not vaccinating is of course nothing like that. Simply stated, not stopping something is not bringing it back<br /><br />Since not vaccinating is a non-action there is no acting to bring back anything. <br /><br />What could happen is, as a result of people seeing through the massive vaccination propaganda campaign and realizing how mild certain illness are, those people might begin to choose protection from vaccination rather than protect from those transient illness. <br /><br />As a result, with fewer vaccinated people, more cases of those illnesses could occur. Conversely children would have to endure fewer vaccines and the risks they present. As such less vaccination would simply be a result of people expressing their personal preferences regarding the risks and benefits of the practice. And since people have no obligation to act in one particular way, one has no cause to feel guilty for making what they believe is the best choice for their families. Other people have no right to selfishly expect us to risk our children’s health to protect them.<br /><br />Interestingly even this scenario is not happening – vaccination rates are still at <a href="http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/808803">all-time high</a>s. And the measles is not making a comeback. In the pre-vaccine era there were four million cases each year. Today there are a few hundred. This is a blip on the radar not a “comeback.” <br /><br />Additionally the number of measles cases fluctuates naturally as do any cyclical illnesses. With vaccination rates stable, we must look to other causes for these fluctuations. Perhaps increased measles activity in another part of the world has led to a few more cases here. Regardless a few more cases of the measles every so often cannot be attributed to America’s appetite for vaccination when our vaccination rates are stable.<br /><br />At this point Dr. Pseudonym&nbsp;launches into a pathetic attempt to transform a minor illness into a existential threat to civilization. There is a “crisis” going on he exhorts. He fantasizes about “the good old days when measles was an active public health threat,” when in reality it was, according to the World Health Organization, considered nothing more than a minor annoyance. [link pending]<br /><br />Here's some evidence regarding the general mildness of the measles and how it is perceived in the absence of a campaign of fear:<br /><br /><br /><ul><li>Although measles vaccine has been licensed since 1968, immunization against measles has not met with much success in France, partly because the disease is<a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/6878995"> no longer feared</a></li></ul><ul><li>In France, measles is usually considered a mild, rather <a href="http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/4453052?uid=3739560&amp;uid=2&amp;uid=4&amp;uid=3739256&amp;sid=21103664649467">trivial disease</a></li></ul><ul><li>For most people who get measles, the illness is <a href="http://sfcdcp.org/measles.html">not serious</a></li></ul><ul><li>we invited some general practitioners to write short reports on the cases they have seen in their practices recently…These writers agree that measles is nowadays normally a mild infection.. *</li></ul><br /><div><br />But Dr. Pseudonym states, “Reports from New York note that several people have been hospitalized.”<br /><br />Don’t hospitalizations mean the illness is serious? <br /><br />No, not really. What we can discern from patients being hospitalized requires that we know why one is hospitalized. Is it a precautionary measure? Must tests be run? Does someone simply need an IV? From media reports, this is not possible. <br /><br />One interesting point is that rates of hospitalization are higher than they were in the pre-vaccine era. Fifty years ago hospitalizations occurred in only about one in eighty-three cases. Today that rate is significantly higher. Perhaps this increase is simply a product of an overcautious society or the result the vaccine establishment’s relentless efforts to overstate the risks of self-limiting illnesses in order to scare people into vaccination. We'll examine one other theory to explain increased hospitalizations when we debunk the next of &nbsp;Dr. Pseudonym’s many specious claims. This one pertains to some measles-related statistics<br /><br />In order to paint a picture in which the measles is somewhat threatening affliction &nbsp;Dr. Pseudonym parrots the misleading CDC claim that;<br /><blockquote class="tr_bq">one to three cases per 1000 in the United States result in death</blockquote>Why is this misleading? Because it is based on one anomalous outbreak occurring during 1989-1991 in the USA, and as anyone familiar with the scientific method realizes, you don’t take one example that is countered by every other available example and hold up the outlier&nbsp;as the standard. And even based upon the data from that outbreak: about 55,000 reported cases and <a href="http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/pubs/surv-manual/chpt07-measles.pdf">123 deaths</a>, we only arrive at one death in 447 cases. Additionally since it is widely known that only about<a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7630992"> half these cases</a> are reported due to their mild nature the figure 1-447 can be logically doubled to about 1 in 900. Neither the former nor the later figure is in line with the CDC’s 1-333 claim. <br /><br />As to the outbreak being anomalous and distorting the actual severity of the measles, living conditions and nutritional status are well-known <a href="http://jid.oxfordjournals.org/content/189/Supplement_1/S4.long">determinants of measles severity </a>and during this epidemic,<a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1307536/"> most cases occurred </a>in low income populations having related risk factors not present in a larger, more representative population. Sadly this was the era of <a href="http://jid.oxfordjournals.org/content/189/Supplement_1/S4.long">HIV</a> and that infection played a role in many of the deaths. For example of the 12 deaths that occurred in New York City in 1989 6 were in persons infected with HIV while in 1990 and 1991, 60% of all measles-related deaths in New Jersey occurred in HIV-infected children.<br /><br />Because co-factors such as HIV infection very often underlie measles mortality, these are classified as measles-RELATED deaths.<br /><br />Other recent outbreaks in<a href="http://www.euro.who.int/en/media-centre/sections/press-releases/2011/12/european-countries-must-take-action-now-to-prevent-continued-measles-outbreaks-in-2012"> Europe</a>, where mortality is much lower, belies the CDC’s one to three deaths per 1000. In fact based on European data and under reporting, it seems the CDC is exaggerating mortality by at least ten fold. In addition to that, in the pre-vaccine era an average of three to four million cases occurred with around four hundred deaths. This comes to about one death for every eight thousand seven hundred and fifty cases.<br /><br />And remember, these deaths were and are concentrated in those with certain risk factors you may not have. So, in the general population, the risks are even lower than those implied by the generalized data. <br /><br />In relation to mortality figures and to the hospitalization rate I discussed previously, I’d now like to examine the idea that vaccination itself has made certain illness slightly more serious. In the case of the measles’ mother’s who had a natural infection as children pass along<a href="http://jid.oxfordjournals.org/content/208/1/1.full"> antibodies </a>that protect for a longer period of time than the antibodies of mothers who were vaccinated. Inferior protection means more vulnerable infants. In other words vaccination interfered with nature’s defense mechanism and infants got measles when they would not have gotten them in the past. <br /><br />Also one dose was used in the eighties and protection from that schedule was found to wane. Additionally with fewer cases it became less likely someone would catch the measles as a child. As a result of these two factors some cases were pushed into adulthood where the illness can be more serious. <br /><br />So should we be worried that vaccination has created a more serious measles threat? The answer is no. In both today’s world and in the pre-vaccine era the measles is and was still mild. It just might be a little less so today for some. The flip side of this is that there are far fewer overall cases.<br /><br />Having advanced the odd notion that an illness used as a comedic device on <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tBsPLAQI7vs">TV programs</a> of the 60s is a serious threat, he then tries to convince us also like us a few hundred cases of the measles are now overwhelming a nation of three hundred million. He frets:<br /><blockquote class="tr_bq">not only is the nation’s largest city seeing cases in several boroughs, but <a href="http://www.boston.com/lifestyle/health/blogs/daily-dose/2014/02/25/measles-contaimnation-case-expands-second-location/PeylzdM1tisMDKCUuWvH9I/blog.html">other major metropolitan areas</a> are warning of new cases as well.</blockquote>then goes on to agonize:<br /><blockquote class="tr_bq">But now, shoppers in Boston-area supermarkets get to worry that they may have been exposed when they stopped by for groceries. Commuters in the Bay Area now have to contend with the possibility that they or their children may contract the <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2014/02/13/health/california-measles/">illness</a> because they happened to get on the wrong train.</blockquote>Calm down, Dr. Pseudonym. It's going to be OK.&nbsp;You're imagining a scenario that is unlikely to occur in the real world. Unlike you, most sane people are not afflicted with an all-consuming fear of germs, I think few people will express the utter terror you have to wrestle with each and every time you leave you house (or is it a plastic bubble?). You're just projecting your phobias onto the rest of us. Besides, doesn’t&nbsp;anybody’s vaccine work?<br /><br /><div><div>Moving on, the doctor continues by sharing this pearl of wisdom:</div><div><blockquote class="tr_bq">We vaccinate people for a reason.</blockquote>What he fails to apprehend is people are not objects that YOU vaccinate. People are sentient beings who decide for themselves whether or not they feel the benefits of vaccination outweigh the risks.&nbsp;&nbsp;</div><br />At this point he enters full mental break-down mode with an irrational rant that continues his spiteful yet incredibly feeble attack on parents who don’t vaccinate: it is a parade of absurdities one more ludicrous than the other. They suffer from the same flaw as does his initial claim that the unvaccinated are bringing back illnesses (by not vaccinating or by having an unknown infection we are in no way acting to encourage, assist or promote infectious agents. Sorry if reality clashes with your delusions, Doctor) We are simply the victims of infection like everyone else. And there is no obligation to risk our health to stop what we perceive to be minor illnesses (or illnesses for which we are not at risk) when the vaccines used to against those infections are judged by parents to be of questionable efficacy and riskier and more painful than the potential infections for which they promise protection. This is an evaluation each parent must make and is not subject to the approval of others. They are our children and it is our choice.<br /><br />Yet despite all evidence to the contrary Dr. Pseudonym, in order to vilify non-vaccinating parents, clings to a line of unreasoning that fixates upon his spurious idea that unvaccinated kids are or could at some point in time act as infectors, transmitters and spreaders of illness. It is not a new argument (the establishment has been trying to engineer this impression for years) just a bad one.</div><div><br />Remember before the rise of vaccine extremism, kids caught a cold or the measles or the chickenpox. But now in the spirit&nbsp;of scapegoating so popular in militant circles, these same kids now have to be “infected” by other kids. Did anyone ever say, Johnny was infected by Billy in years past? Of course not, because the implication that Johnny acted to hurt Billy is absurd. They said Johnny caught this, that or the other thing at school. And Billy didn’t actively pursue these extant germs in a conscious manner to “catch” them anymore than Johnny acted in a way to infect Billy. Parents knew germs were a part of life and they spread through out the community and it was a part of life. Today this is still true and our children have no obligation to allow an oft-erring medical and scientific community to trick their developing immune system in order to alter the course of natural events that have been going on for thousands of years. The only obligations that exist are when a child is knowingly- infected. And that obligation is to stay home, not undergo unwanted medical procedures such as vaccination<br /><br /><a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/13/opinion/why-arent-doctors-drug-tested.html?_r=0">A real case </a>of one person infecting another occurred recently when a medical technician was consciously acting in a way that led to the reusing of contaminated syringes on patients. This is an example of one person acting to infect another. Here the medical technician took physical action with full consciousness of what he was doing in a way that brought harm to another. <br /><br />To use the same term for a child who is the victim of an unknown, unwanted&nbsp;infection&nbsp;and who is simply going about his or her day-to-day life is at best an abuse of the language and at worst a craven attempt to distort reality in order to turn public opinion against innocent parents<br /><br />Dr. Pseudonym&nbsp;proceeds full speed ahead on his cray train leveling some additional charges all related to the concepts I covered earlier It is therefore unnecessary to debunk each one all over again. Instead I’ll post some of his sillier claims accompanied by a rebuttal. He charges:<br /><br />Their [it’s those antivaxxers again] movement is responsible for sickening people. <br /><blockquote class="tr_bq">Movements don’t sicken people. Germs do. </blockquote>They [vaccine deniers I suspect] are to blame for the word “outbreak” appearing in headlines from coast to coast.<br /><blockquote class="tr_bq">Blame implies moral culpability which requires actions or failing to take actions we have an obligation to perform. But we have no obligation to perform the act of vaccination on our children for the alleged benefit of others. Dr. Pseudonym does not even attempt to provide a sketch as to why such an obligation might exist. As such we can easily dismiss this ill-conceived charge.</blockquote>The anti-vaccine crowd [so now we have antivaxxer, vaccine denier and anti-vax crowd. I think one way to predict how weak one’s arguments for vaccination will be is to look at the number of times these type phrases are used] may think they’re only making a decision for their own family. In fact, they’re threatening to make the rest of us sick. <br /><blockquote class="tr_bq">More nonsense. People don’t make other people sick. Germs do.</blockquote>Refusing to vaccinate your children means you are contributing to a worsening public health crisis. <br /><blockquote class="tr_bq">Non actions do not contribute to anything. Non-vaccination simply fails to contribute to a program we have no obligation to support. And the only crisis going on is in your twisted imagination.</blockquote><div>I never want to know that a child was sickened or killed because I let the recklessness of a vaccine-refusing parent jeopardize their health.<br /><blockquote class="tr_bq">This claim can be broken into two equally juvenile arguments. The first, that not vaccinating is reckless is simply one more unsupported assertion: he provides no argument to buttress his charge so there isn’t even anything to refute. The second component of his claim, that children who are unvaccinated are endangering or can endanger others is absurd. Simply being unvaccinated puts no one in danger. I like many of you was not vaccinated for the flu this year and despite my existence in the community, I have put no one in danger. Could the unvaccinated put someone in danger if they catch the flu? Not if they are infected without their knowledge. Putting someone in danger in a way that generates moral culpability requires knowledge and intent: think of becoming intoxicated then driving. This is endangering fellow motorists, but only because you acted (by drinking) and did so knowing the ramifications of your actions.</blockquote><br />In parting I'd like to leave you with this piece of advice Dr. Pseudonym. Go ahead and&nbsp;hide out in your little hole of an office in New England and make sure everyone you come in contact has received each and every vaccine Big Pharma can produce and that the CDC can foist upon America. And zip up that plastic bubble of yours real tight because you’re not going to use my children to alleviate your paranoia or provide you the protection you and your fellow extremists are responsible to provide to yourselves.</div><div><br /><br /><br /><br /></div><div><br /></div><div>*"Measles Epidemic": British Medical Journal, Feb 7 1959, Page 354</div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div></div></div>Robert Schecterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17592918924115887297noreply@blogger.com58tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2738066875990661293.post-16960358234617903542013-11-14T13:43:00.000-08:002013-11-14T13:43:04.591-08:00Refuting the Ridiculous<div><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-T_taMIK6-ag/UoU-UZdBdxI/AAAAAAAAAXs/C0W95dxDsgA/s1600/2112+99.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-T_taMIK6-ag/UoU-UZdBdxI/AAAAAAAAAXs/C0W95dxDsgA/s1600/2112+99.jpg" /></a></div><div><br /><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: #111111; font-family: &quot;Helvetica Neue&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;">With so many vaccine fan boys and fan girls in the mainstream media it is difficult to keep up with all the Internet polluting trash they are able to produce. <a href="http://www.newrepublic.com/article/115551/jenny-mccarthy-anti-vaccination-movement-blame-whooping-cough">This piece</a>, by a Ms Julia Ioffe and appearing on the far left New Republic website, came to my attention this week and provided an insight into the muddled thinking that afflicts so many in the cult of vaccination. It was not until a number of fans on our Facebook page asked us to respond did I decide to take the time to publicly debunk this confused piece of hysteria, misinformation and self-pity.<br /><br />Many of you have already suffered the tedium of reading the piece to which we're responding, but for those who have not, it is one woman's self-absorbed account of her case of pertussis and her ludicrous claim that either Jenny McCarty or unvaccinated people in general are to blame. The title says it all: I've got whooping cough. Thanks a lot Jenny McCarty. Here's our response:<br /></span>Thank pertussis you entitled little cry-baby, because that's what's got you sick, not Jenny or any other unvaccinated person.</div><br />Everybody in the nation must get shot after shot of pertussis vaccine so you don't get a cough? Sorry, it doesn't work that way. Pertussis exists where people do, so you might just have to leave society if it is too dangerous for you.<br /><br />You’re sense of entitlement is off the charts as evidenced by the fact you don’t think <a href="http://twitchy.com/2013/11/12/maybe-jenny-mccarthy-isnt-solely-to-blame-for-tnr-writers-whooping-cough/">YOU should not have to get the vaccine</a> because everyone else should. That's right, even though the vaccine is available and recommended for adults she blames us, not her failure to vaccinate herself. Ever hear of individual responsibility Ms. Ioffe?<br /><br />Apparently this writer is quite a sickly individual as evidenced by her claim to have what appears to be the worst adult case of whooping cough in the history of the adult cases of pertussis. For almost every other adult, the illness is <a href="http://www.bupa.co.uk/individuals/health-information/directory/w/whooping-cough">quite mild</a>. Apparently you have an inability to fight of illnesses – that’s not Jenny’s fault either.<br /> <br /> *<a href="http://www.bmj.com/content/310/6975/299">Mild</a><br /><br />(And what about that claim saying even a little vaccine makes cases milder. I guess that’s just a another medical establishment myth.)<br /><br />If pertussis does this to you, I’d hate to see what shape the flu would leave you in. I guess that's another shot all 300 million American’s will have to get - after all we don't want you to blame us for your lack of personal responsibility.<br /><br />Finally, after what seems to be an eternity, she mercifully departs from her account of each and every coughing spell she’s experienced over the past few months and moves on to parroting a few talking points crafted by the vaccine establishment.<br /><br />She prattles on about vaccination not being an individual choice because it affects others. This is absurd. My not vaccinating affects no one. I did not get the flu shot this year and that has affected no one. Besides our choices affect other people all the time. I offered to pay more for my current home than another interested party. I got the house and he didn’t. He was affected by my decision. So what?<br /><br />She then implies there is some type of obligation for everyone in America to lap up each and every vaccine Merck can produce in order to create the holy grail of the vaccine idolaters: herd immunity. Unfortunately she fails to provide any support for her implication. This is not surprising since no such obligation exists<br /><br />She then goes on to reveal her scientific illiteracy by claiming vaccine exepmptors were behind a 2010 epidemic, quoting a <a href="http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/early/2013/09/24/peds.2013-0878.abstract">study</a> whose data in no way supports such an assertion. The bogus study to which she refers was manufactured by the vaccine establishment as a way to provide a naive media a way to support their false and ignorant claims. The “study” only finds some association between areas with more vaccine exemptions (and it is important to remember exemptions are calculated based on as few as one exemption and need not be an exemption to the pertussis vaccine) and cases of pertussis. It does not demonstrate this association was meaningful enough to have any impact on the outbreak. The <a href="http://www.kpbs.org/news/2012/aug/15/whooping-cough-vaccine-failures-increasing/">real reasons</a> for the increase in cases are well know: a <a href="http://www.internalmedicinenews.com/news/conference-news/infectious-diseases-society-of-america-conference/single-article/acellular-pertussis-vaccine-s-waning-immunity-caused-california-epidemic/71de9826f4.html">bad vaccine</a> and <a href="http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp1209051?query=TOC&amp;fb_source=message">increased reporting</a><br /><br />And even if her claim were true, those who did not vaccinate would not be “responsible” for her pertussis since there is no responsibility to medicate one’s self so someone else doesn't get sick. It is important to understand poor Ms. Ioffe’s illness is caused by pertussis, not any unvaccinated individual.<br /><br />He rant continues as she goes on to thank the unvaccinated for her pertussis (I guess we’re responsible for her feeble immune response as well) but, as this post demonstrates, she needs to thank pertussis not anyone of us. <br /><br />She completes her self-indulgent decent into lunacy by claiming being unvaccinated killed babies during the epidemic. Only someone either in a total state of delusion or one who is willfully ignorant of how causality works could make such an absurd claim<br /><br /> This poor little hothouse flower ends by saying how humiliating her bout with pertussis was, not realizing that broadcasting her ignorance across the internet does far more to humiliate her than any case of pertussis ever could.Robert Schecterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17592918924115887297noreply@blogger.com8tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2738066875990661293.post-45998632116903366232013-09-03T11:37:00.000-07:002013-09-03T14:43:20.710-07:00The Picture of Desperation<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-ULVfYrLSE3E/UiYPJBSuS0I/AAAAAAAAAWo/JMGCU6-jKfs/s1600/!+A234.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-ULVfYrLSE3E/UiYPJBSuS0I/AAAAAAAAAWo/JMGCU6-jKfs/s1600/!+A234.jpg" /></a></div><br /><br /><br />As more people become aware of the low risks posed by infectious illnesses, vaccine fanatics have had to take their campaign of fear mongering to a new low. In a desperate attempt to deceive parents, the extremists, holed up in basements and garages throughout the USA, England and Australia, are compiling a series of photos they hope will scare parents into vaccinating. (At first I was not going to give credence to the reprehensible tactics used by these reprobates by linking to the actual photos. But now I realize <a href="http://tinyurl.com/kuwdcve">linking to them</a> is the best way to expose this particular act of desperation ) &nbsp;Oddly, some of the photos actually show nothing more than a frowning child with a rash - I guess some illnesses are so mild even a worst-case scenario photo is incapable of instilling even moderate concern. On the other hand, a few pictures do portray incredibly rare but undoubtedly severe outcomes that can rarely result from the combination of infectious illnesses and contributing factors such as impaired immune status or environmental deprivations. <br /><br />Since a picture tells us nothing about these co-factors it is entirely without context and therefore tells us nothing meaningful, it is simply an appeal to emotion designed to override reason. For example is the picture from&nbsp;Botswana or Baton Rouge? Is the victim a homeless drug abuser or a healthy adult? Was the child healthy or severely malnourished?<br /><div><br />Additionally, if we don't know how often a severe outcome will occur we cannot measure the risks of that outcome and therefore cannot use the photo as a means by which we make a decision to vaccinate or not.<br /><br /><div><div><div>That is the intent of propaganda. Photos without context do little to inform our decision making. This type of tactic demonstrates the utter lack of scruples in the vaccine fanatic cult. Let's break down the photos one by one:<br /><br />The mumps one is silly. It is just a child with a swollen neck. The photo often used because most cases are not noticeable to this extent. So an extreme case must be used or there would just be a picture of a normal looking child in a textbook section on the mumps. Mumps is universally acknowledged to be a mild illness<br /><br />The measles photo is another that can't be taken seriously. It is a child with a rash and a frown. Not very worrisome<br /><br />Pertussis is another silly one. It is a photo of a child coughing. I wonder where the photo of the crying caused by the pain of injection after injection is.<br /><br />Rubella or German measles is the next. The photo does not really show much but science says the German measles are, as illnesses go, the mildest of the mild. Just be sure to get them as a child because if a woman gets them while pregnant her child could suffer severe outcomes. Intentionally getting them as a child was what doctors of the 1960's recommended. <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Dangerous-Pregnancies-Mothers-Disabilities-Abortion/dp/B00CC7M6U6">[2]</a><br /><br />Diphtheria photo is probably the most deceptive since it is not a photo of the common form of the illness. It is rather a photo of cutaneous diphtheria. According to&nbsp;patient.co.uk<br /><br /><a href="http://www.patient.co.uk/doctor/Diphtheria.htm">Cutaneous diphtheria</a> is most often associated with the homeless and those with poor personal and community hygiene.<br /><br />Hunter's Tropical Medicine describes it this way:<br /><br />Outbreaks of cutaneous diphtheria have occurred among impoverished or indigent populations, homeless individuals and alcoholics, and in environments with overcrowding and unhygienic living arrangements<br /><br />So if your child isn't a homeless alcoholic, I wouldn't worry.<br /><br />Finally we come to polio. The vaccine cultists would not know what to do with themselves if they didn't have to polio card to play. Because they know little about the history of polio, the extent of their argument cannot progress past the point of parroting, "what about polio?" What about polio indeed. First polio was blown out of all proportion by a campaign of fear created by the March of Dimes in order to raise money to fight the illness. <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Patenting-Sun-Polio-Salk-Vaccine/dp/0688094945">[1]</a>&nbsp;Second overzealous doctors caused many cases of polio as a result of their mindless quest to <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poliomyelitis">vaccinate children or the era and remove parts of their immune system</a>, specifically the tonsils and appendix. Third paralytic polio only emerged in <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poliomyelitis">1 of 200</a> infections (1-1,000 in children) and half of those <a href="http://www.answers.com/topic/poliomyelitis">resolved</a> on their own. Fourth polio in epidemic form did not exist before the late 1800's and one must conclude environmental changes precipitated the disease's emergence. Since polio fell about 50% before vaccination became widespread, one cannot say what the state of polio would be today because environmental conditions are again quite different from the 40's and 50's. For example at that time children were regularly exposed to&nbsp;two potent immune suppressants.&nbsp;Lead (scientists at the time said it was as safe as apple pie) and DDT. Lead, from the exhaust of automobiles filled the air while DDT both contaminated the nation's milk supply and was <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uf6KkjBCoVU">sprayed upon children</a> as they played in the streets.<br /><div><br />So to assert polio would return if vaccination against it stopped has no basis in science is nothing more than wild speculation of a handful of vaccine cultists.<br /><br />In a future post, we'll cover a few more of these illnesses - including the dreaded chickenpox. In the meantime, I wouldn't let one of these pictures scare me into vaccinating anymore than I would let a picture of a car crash scare me from driving to the supermarket.<br /><br /><br /><br /><br />1 - Patenting the Sun Page 82</div></div></div></div></div>Robert Schecterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17592918924115887297noreply@blogger.com12tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2738066875990661293.post-18281453951664103782013-08-12T10:14:00.000-07:002013-08-12T10:42:07.842-07:00The L.A. Times: Wrong on Vaccination<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-IGO5xusUMjE/UgfrYqrZ5iI/AAAAAAAAAWU/4czJvtXNhiw/s1600/!+A12A1A.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="135" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-IGO5xusUMjE/UgfrYqrZ5iI/AAAAAAAAAWU/4czJvtXNhiw/s320/!+A12A1A.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><br /><br /><br /><div>Over the weekend I came a across a laughable <a href="http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-shapiro-schools-and-vaccination-rates-20130811,0,4512282.story">editorial </a>in the L.A. Times parroting some common establishment talking points in support of compulsory vaccination. Readers of this blog will be familiar with them since they are trotted out on a regular basis by the vaccine extremists and public health fanatics that seem to have open access to the editorial pages of the nations mainstream media. This particular writer, a Nina Shapiro, a professor at <a href="http://www.latimes.com/topic/education/colleges-universities/university-of-california-los-angeles-OREDU0000192268.topic">UCLA</a>'s Geffen School of Medicine, incorporates a number of shop-worn distortions into her piece attacking vaccine exemptions. She claims illnesses that almost never kill are life-threatening in their nature, suggests that in some schools 80% of the children are unvaccinated and implies that if we're not good little boys and girls, polio is going to come back and get us.<br /><br />I responded to Ms. Shapiro's nonsense with this comment:<br /><br />Let me educate you on some facts “doctor.” The measles is not a life-threatening illness. Measles almost never kills. And when it does it is due to a combination of the virus and mitigating factors such as poor nutrition. Pertussis is also almost never a killer. With between <a href="http://www.chop.edu/service/vaccine-education-center/a-look-at-each-vaccine/dtap-diphtheria-tetanus-and-pertussis-vaccine.html">500,000 and one million cases</a> each year only about <a href="http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/pubs/pinkbook/pert.html">twenty deaths</a> occur. Sweden abandoned the whole-cell vaccine for <a href="http://jcm.asm.org/content/43/6/2856.full">17 years</a> and deaths were apparently so minimal the literature makes no mention of them. So please spare us your wild-eyed hyperbole. <br /><br />It is no surprise far-left extremists such as those running the LA Times would publish a call to take away a parents right to make medical decisions and hand it over to the state and the public health crazies whose very existence depends on America’s insane vaccination policy <br /><br />Your “goal” of “protecting children” from mild illnesses by forcing parents to make those children endure a series of painful, risky and never-ending unwanted vaccinations is an idea incompatible with the concepts of liberty upon which this nation was founded. A moral government’s only role is to defends rights – not save lives, decide how much soda we can drink or&nbsp;<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 12pt;">decide where and when fast-food restaurants can be built</span>. With their rights secure, individuals are perfectly capable of protecting their own children without the heavy hand of government compulsion guiding their every decision.&nbsp;</div><div><br />What they need protection from is statists and the out-of-control vaccine schedule they propagate <br /><br />Rather than attack exemptions, we should abolish them altogether and let parents, not self-serving bureaucrats and vaccine shills, decide what is right for their children. <br /><br />Additionally your claims about unvaccinated children are highly deceptive since even <a href="http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm6021a4.htm">one missed vaccine</a> out of the countless ones that populate the schedule can place a child in your unvaccinated category. Your implication that 80% of children in some schools fall into this category are ludicrous&nbsp;and you should be ashamed for making it.<br /><br />And where did polio kill millions. Certainly not in the Western world. Even in the worst years it killed perhaps 3,000 with a peak of 6,000 in 1916. And polio was in great measure the result of an out-of-control medical system that indiscriminately removed the tonsils of almost every child of that era. Perhaps you unaware of the fact that the tonsils are part of the immune system and their removal greatly<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poliomyelitis"> increases the risk</a> of polio. Injections as a result of vaccination also <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poliomyelitis">predisposed children</a> to paralytic polio. <br /><br />Cases were down almost <a href="http://www.drwile.com/lnkpages/pol_mease.jpg">50%</a> before the vaccine was widely used and they fell further as a result of the disease being reclassified. Additionally much of the nation’s milk supply was&nbsp;<a href="http://www.researchgate.net/publication/237830229_The_Effects_of_Feeding_Parathion_to_Dairy_Cows1_and_2">contaminated</a> by DDT, a potent <a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20297919">immune suppressant</a>, during polio's peak era: the late 40's and early 50's . Polio emerged in epidemic form from nowhere in the late 1800's due to factors too numerous to describe here, and with conditions wildly different today, it is abject speculation to say polio would be today what it was 60 years ago - vaccine or not.<br /><br /></div>Robert Schecterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17592918924115887297noreply@blogger.com6tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2738066875990661293.post-21074710483469399172013-02-13T09:51:00.001-08:002013-02-13T09:51:43.679-08:00Trust the Liars<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><object width="320" height="266" class="BLOGGER-youtube-video" classid="clsid:D27CDB6E-AE6D-11cf-96B8-444553540000" codebase="http://download.macromedia.com/pub/shockwave/cabs/flash/swflash.cab#version=6,0,40,0" data-thumbnail-src="http://2.gvt0.com/vi/_G0vXaTAMMY/0.jpg"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/_G0vXaTAMMY&fs=1&source=uds" /><param name="bgcolor" value="#FFFFFF" /><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true" /><embed width="320" height="266" src="http://www.youtube.com/v/_G0vXaTAMMY&fs=1&source=uds" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true"></embed></object></div><br /><br /><br />You guys are gonna get a kick out of this. Vaccine pusher / drug company shill Amy Pisani the executive director of Every Child By Two @3:08 states "Vaccines save millions and millions of lives every day around the world." Millions means at least two million, so millions and millions means at least 4 million. So according to Amy, four million lives are saved each and every day due to the miracle of vaccination. This is of course impossible. In one year alone 1.46 billion lives would be saved because of vaccines. The population of the entire planet only amounts to about seven billion souls. In just five years time the entire planet would be saved by vaccines. Absurd! Ms. Pisani is yet another unfortunate example of an establishment functionary being either obliviously ignorant about the vaccination issue or incredibly dishonest. I don’t know which is worse. So for parents who have heard the song and dance about how we should only accept immunization information from websites approved by a conflicted vaccine establishment, remember it’s people such as Amy who are running and recommending these sites.Robert Schecterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17592918924115887297noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2738066875990661293.post-49780290259052883562012-11-01T09:33:00.000-07:002012-11-01T09:34:09.756-07:00Educating the Uneducatable<br />Yesterday one of our Facebook members shared our Halloween themed meme&nbsp;&nbsp;on her Facebook page and got this reaction criticizing &nbsp;the meme's content:<br /><br /><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-XRpZlmCyVHM/UJFx7Y0ENLI/AAAAAAAAAVE/D33-ledNejg/s1600/!hallow.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="224" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-XRpZlmCyVHM/UJFx7Y0ENLI/AAAAAAAAAVE/D33-ledNejg/s320/!hallow.png" width="320" /></a></div><br /><br />...one does not prelude the other<br /><br />and <br /><br />The vast majority of medically educated doctors, nurses and scientists throughout the world (including your own pediatrician) believe that, properly used, vaccines are generally safe and effective. Are they infallible? Certainly not, no more so than antibiotics or seatbelts. You can also choose to believe that the world is flat. It's your right. It's also my right to call into question illogical comments, like the one posted. It's simply not either or. There is no vast pharmaceutical company conspiracy. If there is then hundreds of thousands of doctors are incredibly stupid and the anti-vaccine amateurs have all the answers. I don't believe that.<br /><br /><br /><br />Here is my response:<br /><br />Your friends criticism of this meme fails in several ways. He constructs a “vast pharmaceutical company conspiracy” straw man argument out of a one sentence meme having nothing to do with a “conspiracy.” Then he goes off on a “flat Earth” tangent which has as much relevance as does the “conspiracy” straw man.<br />Then he puts his faith in a medical system that over and over is found, by the mainstream media and some elements of the system itself, to be overtreating patients with antibiotics, cat scans, x-rays, unnecessary surgery etc. He then creates a false dichotomy in which the only way obedience to the vaccination schedule can be unwise is if “hundreds of thousands of doctors are incredibly stupid and the anti-vaccine amateurs have all the answers” Then assumes something’s safety and effectiveness automatically makes a product valuable to me. (And can you really call the pertussis shot, for example, effective when one now needs six or seven doses over a twenty year period? Especially when a natural infection provides 30 years to lifetime immunity and decreases the chances of transmission during the child bearing years) Let’s not even talk about if they are safe or not. It is a fact when a child is vaccinated; pain is inflicted on him or her. There must be a good reason for this. (Eighteen trips to the doctor during one's childhood for a yearly, painful flu shot seems hardly worthwhile when you're unlikely to get the illness or suffer substantially from it) But in addition to the pain are the accepted common adverse events: high pitched crying, somnolence, fever, irritability etc. Then there are risks such as the chance of contamination (SV40 incident with polio vaccines) or discovering mercury levels exceeded safety limits after a generation has received those vaccines. Then add in something like <a href="http://www.survivingmesothelioma.com/news/view.asp?ID=001394">this recent news</a> which illustrates how little we know about playing around with biological systems<br /><br />Then combine it with this <a href="http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=10997&amp;page=169">Institute of Medicine report from 2004</a>:<br /><br /><blockquote class="tr_bq">The report, issued by the IOM’s Immunization Safety Review Committee, found that scientific evidence from epidemiological studies on whether allergy, including asthma, can be caused by multiple vaccinations was conflicting and concluded that the evidence “was inadequate to accept or reject a causal relationship.” The Committee concluded that epidemiological studies to date “favor rejection of a causal relationship between multiple immunizations and increased risk for infections and for type 1 diabetes.” However, the Committee also concluded that they did find some biological mechanism evidence that vaccines could increase the risk of immune dysfunction in some children that could lead to increased infections and allergy, including asthma. They stated that, “The biological mechanisms evidence regarding increased risk for infections is strong.”</blockquote><br />Then add to that the huge increases in the immune dysfunction in the young and ask yourself if tricking that developing system is such a good idea.<br /><br />So to conclude, nutrition status (part one of the meme) determines to a large degree the severity of these illnesses. On the other hand drugs and medications are detrimental unless they have a benefit that overcomes their risks and side effects. So if part one protects, why take on the risks of part two? As the risk of an illness drops, the benefit of the preventative measure also drops. So yes, if you take the steps mentioned in part one of the meme you may not need the treatments touched upon in part two.<br /><br /><br />Robert Schecterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17592918924115887297noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2738066875990661293.post-18539427344326077822012-05-03T08:53:00.000-07:002012-05-03T08:55:01.098-07:00An Open Letter to Lisa Murawski<br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-Dfq0uqfJ6c4/T6KmYJORXuI/AAAAAAAAAUk/tt6IjrHaReo/s1600/1+lisa+2.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-Dfq0uqfJ6c4/T6KmYJORXuI/AAAAAAAAAUk/tt6IjrHaReo/s1600/1+lisa+2.jpg" /></a></div><br /><br />AB2109, the bill to herd California parents into a doctor's office for a vaccine lecture in order to obtain a vaccine exemption, is getting closer and closer to becoming law. Just this week, based upon an error-ridden fiscal assessment, the bill passed out of the Assembly Appropriations Committee. One interesting point regarding the cost analysis was its blatant incongruence. Initially, in order to scare readers, the report describes a frightening scenario in which parents are abandoning vaccines in droves:<br /><blockquote class="tr_bq">the number of vaccine exemptions has increased dramatically in the last decade, leading to real concern about the loss of "herd immunity" and potential for serious disease outbreaks</blockquote>Amazingly, the costs to combat such a major problem will, according to the report, be almost no existent. To minimize cost concerns in order to get the bill out of committee, readers are promised the remedy to drag all these exemptors back to the herd will have almost no financial impact on the state. The report asserts:<br /><pre></pre><blockquote>Any impact on Medi-Cal or Healthy Families Program from a small number of <br />increased office visits, to the extent any program enrollees seek exemptions and require additional office visits to do so, is likely to be negligible. </blockquote><br />Further mistakes and misrepresentation prompted me to contact the author. Here is the text of an email I sent today:<br /><br /><br />In your analysis of AB2109 you state: <br /><blockquote class="tr_bq">“In contrast, the risk of death if someone contracts measles is about 1 in 500” </blockquote>Not that you care, but this bit of “information” has no basis in reality. In the pre-vaccine era 3-4 million people contracted the measles with ~400 deaths. In Europe in 2011 about 30K cases were reported with ~9 deaths. Your 1-500 number is fantasy<br /><br /><a href="http://www.cdc.gov/measles/vaccination.html">http://www.cdc.gov/measles/vaccination.html</a> <br />Measles can be prevented by the combination MMR (measles, mumps, and rubella) vaccine. In the decade before the measles vaccination program began, an estimated 3–4 million people in the United States were infected each year, of whom 400–500 died, <br /><br /><a href="http://www.epimonitor.net/Measles_Outbreak_in_Europe.htm">http://www.epimonitor.net/Measles_Outbreak_in_Europe.htm</a> <br />A new report by the World Health Organization in the Weekly Epidemiologic Record has documented more than 30,000 cases of measles in the European Region in 2010 and more than 26,000 thru October in 2011. These numbers of cases come after three years of record low levels in 2007-2009. Measles outbreaks were reported from 36 countries in the region in 2011 and about one quarter of the reported cases (28%) in 2011 were hospitalized and 9 children died. <br /><br />Additionally, your assertion that, “vaccines are generally considered a crowning public health achievement, and are credited with major reductions in morbidity and mortality over the last century,” is laughable. Anyone not parroting the talking points of the vaccine establishment understands huge decline in mortality came well before the age of vaccination. <br /><br /><a href="http://childhealthsafety.wordpress.com/graphs/">http://childhealthsafety.wordpress.com/graphs/</a> <br /><br /><a href="http://www.healthsentinel.com/joomla/index.php?option=com_content&amp;view=article&amp;id=2654:united-states-disease-death-rates&amp;catid=55:united-states-deaths-from-diseases&amp;Itemid=55">http://www.healthsentinel.com/joomla/index.php?option=com_content&amp;view=article&amp;id=2654:united-states-disease-death-rates&amp;catid=55:united-states-deaths-from-diseases&amp;Itemid=55</a> <br /><br />I hope parents will not be subjected to this this type of misinformation during their state-mandated vaccine lecture. <br /><br /><br /><br /><br />Robert Schecter <br /><br />Robert Schecterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17592918924115887297noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2738066875990661293.post-36601500949069288662012-03-29T13:50:00.001-07:002012-04-02T14:25:37.442-07:00A Matter of Freedom and Liberty<br /><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-dGxfiY0eSPQ/T3TIru9_gpI/AAAAAAAAAUY/bBtwe8Mr4vw/s1600/1+lib.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-dGxfiY0eSPQ/T3TIru9_gpI/AAAAAAAAAUY/bBtwe8Mr4vw/s1600/1+lib.jpg" /></a></div><br /><br /><br /><br />The state senator behind a new bill stripping vaccine choice from Vermont parents wrote<a href="http://www.rutlandherald.com/article/20120329/OPINION03/703299969/0/7DAY"> this piece</a>&nbsp;in the Rutland Herald (directly below) defending his proposed legislation. It is both unpersuasive and confused. Our response below points out the flaws in his reasoning and delineates why the legislation should be rejected.<br /><br /><br /><span style="color: blue; font-size: large;">A matter of health and safety </span><br /><br /><br />Published: March 29, 2012 <br /><br /><br />Throughout the debate on whether to eliminate the exemption for children to attend school without the recommended vaccines for philosophical reasons, much has focused on the personal stories of parents involved on both sides. We’ve heard from parents of children whose lives have been saved by a vaccine, and we’ve heard from parents who believe strongly that their children do not need immunizations and should not be forced into medical action. I come at this debate with a personal story of my own. <br /><br />When he was an infant, my son Bartley received the recommended dosage of vaccine for measles, mumps and rubella (MMR). It was the typical torturous experience for a parent to see a needle enter your child’s tiny leg, but it was necessary and safe, our pediatrician said. The problem was the unexpected reaction my son had to the immunization — an extremely high fever. Our doctor recommended we forgo the second dose of MMR and today my son is not fully vaccinated against those diseases. I worried last year when Vermont saw its first case of measles in a decade. I’ll worry tomorrow, just in case. <br /><br />For me it’s always come down to the single question of whether we can save a child’s life by protecting the greater public. We entered into this debate with a lot of questions and have spent the bulk of the session hearing hours of compelling testimony, studying the science behind the facts and listening to passionate parents on both sides of this issue. <br /><br />No one will tell you it was easy, and no one will tell you that we take this job lightly. But our job is to ensure our decisions have a positive impact on society, and it would be irresponsible for us to look at the facts — a growing number of vaccine-preventable disease outbreaks in Vermont and an increasing number of children being exempted from having the CDC recommended immunizations to enter kindergarten — and not act. <br /><br />That is where we find ourselves today: We must act to change the course we are on. For me, if that means one less child contracts whooping cough —compared to more than 90 who did in 2011 — it’s enough of a reason to act.<br /><br />For many of the opponents, there have been further erroneous arguments to try and derail the legislation, claiming constitutional violations under both the U.S. and Vermont constitutions. After careful review by legislative legal counsel, it is clear that both constitutions allow for the protection of religious beliefs under the First Amendment. <br /><br />The U.S. Supreme Court decided that a state may impinge upon the practice of a sincere religious belief only if the state’s interest is of “sufficient magnitude” to justify overriding the religious belief. The Vermont Constitution provides that no authority shall interfere with the free exercise of religion.<br /><br />In contrast, philosophical beliefs do not receive the same protections. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that, since philosophical beliefs are based on a “subjective evaluation and rejection of the secular values accepted by the majority” they do not rise to the level of religious beliefs and thus, not eligible for the same protections. The Vermont Supreme Court ruled that conduct that is “merely a matter of personal preference” does not rise to the demands of religious freedom.<br /><br />Vermont, like every other state, requires children be vaccinated in order to enroll in school. There are reasons for this mandate. The most important reason is that without immunizations, our community could be plagued by serious, and sometimes fatal diseases that are avoidable. We’ve already seen an alarming rise in whooping cough cases in our state, and those numbers coincide with a high exemption rate. <br /><br />Eliminating the philosophical exemption is not meant to infringe on parental rights. It’s meant to narrow the scope under which Vermonters can opt out of immunizations and ensure more children receive life-saving vaccines. <br /><br />While we, as public servants, have an obligation to represent the views of our constituents, so too do we have an obligation to protect the people we serve. Sometimes that means making tough and often unpopular decisions. Passing S.199 to eliminate philosophical exemptions is a matter of public health and safety. It’s that simple.<br /><br /><br /><br />SEN. KEVIN J. MULLIN<br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><span style="color: blue; font-size: large;">Response: A Matter of Freedom and Liberty</span><br /><br />Sen. Mullin<br /><br />Freedom is the core principle of America. A legitimate government’s role is to ensure that freedom not to “save lives.” &nbsp;A government whose task is to “save lives” is a government that has no limitations.<br /><br />“Saving lives” sounds nice but for the government to “‘save lives” it must threaten or initiate violence against innocent people. After all what do you think would happen if a parent declined not to apply for a remaining religious exemption? The parent’s child would be barred from school then the parent would be hauled before a court under threat of force for violating the state’s compulsory education laws. Hiding the specter of state-sponsored violence behind compulsory education laws does not mean the violence is not there.<br /><br />Besides there is no evidence that the change brought about by this law will ever result in the saving of even one life.<br /><br />As to a vaccine being “necessary” that’s silly. Food and water is necessary. A vaccine is not. In regards to your worry about one case of the measles, that’s mystifying. In the pre-vaccine era, the nation saw as many as four million cases per year. Yet parents were not “worried” about the illness. Worry about your own kids and we’ll worry about ours.<br /><br />Free people can save lives. If they see mild illnesses such as the measles, mumps and chickenpox as threats they can choose to vaccinate.<br /><br />As to your insistence that:<br /><blockquote class="tr_bq">The most important reason is that without immunizations, our community could be plagued by serious and sometimes fatal diseases that are avoidable.</blockquote>This is preposterous. First the most common illnesses prevented by vaccine (at least for a few years) are all mild, not serious. Besides before widespread mandates polio, whooping cough, diphtheria, measles, mumps and rubella were all controlled by voluntary action.<br /><br />Then there is your “alarm” over whooping cough. No one besides you and your allies in the public heath establishment is “alarmed” by whooping cough. This proposed legislation after all did not emerge from an overwhelming public demand terrified of whooping cough. And to connect the illness to a few vaccine exemptions is absurd. Perhaps when you were “studying the science behind the facts” you failed to come across the “fact” that the whooping cough vaccine is notoriously ineffective and (along with increased awareness) that ineffectiveness is what is driving so-called outbreaks occurring across the country. As to a rising in whooping cough coinciding with exemptions, did you, when playing scientific researcher, come across the principle that correlation does not equal causation. Or would that principle clash with your manufactured narrative undergirding your attempt to strip parents of their right to raise their children as they see fit?<br /><br />Your remark that the bill will “ensure more children receive life-saving vaccines” is odd. Vaccines prevent generally mild illnesses and mortality from vaccine-preventable illnesses was in a virtual free-fall long before the advent of vaccination. As such the odds a child will receive a vaccine that actually saves his or her life is astronomically low. The life-saving vaccine mantra seems more spin than substance.<br /><br />Asserting that, “passing S.199… is a matter of public health and safety,” raises the question of whether the people’s freedom can be taken for the nebulous concept of “public health and safety” It cannot unless a threat to that health and safety is the result of a rights violation perpetrated by another. Not vaccinating violates no rights and as such laws forcing the practice upon the unwilling do not come under the purview of government. <br /><br />You then imagine you “have an obligation to protect the people you serve.” You do not; you have an obligation to protect people’s rights. There is a difference. &nbsp;When the government has the power to protect people it does so by hurting either them (for their own good of course) or others (in this case those who do not want medical treatments for their healthy children) When the government can only protect rights, no innocents are targeted - only those who, by their actions; for example reckless behavior, violence, theft, etc.; become the legitimate targets of government power.<br /><br />The fundamental problem is you do not understand the concept nation was built on: freedom. Rather you are obsessed with and driven by concepts of collectivism, activism and paternalism.<br /><br />It’s not your role to manage the health of those living in your state. Vermonters are people able to care for themselves, not pets reliant on your benevolent despotism.<br /><br />There is one final establishment talking point (not raised here) that needs to be addressed: those too young for vaccines or those with poorly functioning immune systems or those undergoing chemotherapy rely on others for protection. First those concerned about a child being too young to get a vaccine can keep those children home rather than compel others (through the state) to act against their will to create a sterile world for them. &nbsp;Second, while it is terribly sad that some children have health issues their misfortune does not obligate others to act against their better judgment to protect them – especially when that level of protection is ill-defined and likely quite small.<br /><br />Parents are certainly free to vaccinate based on the above line of reasoning but that action must be voluntary.<br /><br />Stand up for freedom, Vermont. Reject this misguided legislation.<br /><br /><br />Robert J. SchecterRobert Schecterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17592918924115887297noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2738066875990661293.post-89532122621154579362012-03-29T00:23:00.001-07:002012-04-02T14:26:13.682-07:00California Vaccine Exemption Contact Information<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-RLQP78pwE3U/T3QNwguQoRI/AAAAAAAAAUQ/GsPm6pXE5Q4/s1600/1+cont.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-RLQP78pwE3U/T3QNwguQoRI/AAAAAAAAAUQ/GsPm6pXE5Q4/s1600/1+cont.jpg" /></a></div><br /><br /><br />Click this link for information on how to make your voice heard in Sacramento<br /><br /><a href="http://nvicadvocacy.org/members/Resources/CAOPPOSEAB2109RestrictingVaccineExemptions.aspx">http://nvicadvocacy.org/members/Resources/CAOPPOSEAB2109RestrictingVaccineExemptions.aspx</a> <br /><br /><br />Robert Schecterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17592918924115887297noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2738066875990661293.post-71754225593332170982012-03-23T07:10:00.001-07:002012-04-02T14:26:39.113-07:00Dr. Bob Sears Defending the Right to Vaccine Exemptions<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-R1jmxptbVLE/T2yDrijYGsI/AAAAAAAAAUA/pkcZuWt4dGQ/s1600/1+bobby.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-R1jmxptbVLE/T2yDrijYGsI/AAAAAAAAAUA/pkcZuWt4dGQ/s1600/1+bobby.jpg" /></a></div><br /><br />Well-known pediatrician and best-selling author Dr. Bob Sears comes out strongly against a bill forcing parents to hear a vaccine lecture before they can get a philosophical exemption to vaccination.<br /><br /><br /><br />STATEMENT FROM DR BOB SEARS RE: CALIFORNIA ASSEMBLY BILL <br /><br />California Bill AB2109 Threatens Vaccine Freedom of Choice <br /><br />The California Legislature is currently considering a bill that would require parents to obtain their doctor’s signature on a government form prior to enrollment in public school if they wish to skip one or more vaccines for their child. Current law allows parents to decline vaccines by signing an exemption form at the school – no doctor’s signature needed. The new law would require “a written statement signed by a health care practitioner that indicates that the practitioner provided the parent with information regarding the benefits and risks of the immunization and the health risks of specified communicable diseases.” <br /><br />On the surface, this doesn’t seem like a bad idea. It will require parents to prove that they’ve had an informed discussion with their physician. Most parents already have such discussions anyway. However, what gravely concerns me is that some doctors will refuse to sign this form. I know how doctors think. Many doctors strongly believe that vaccines should be mandatory, and that parents should not have the right to decline vaccines. Some doctors are willing to provide care to unvaccinated kids, despite this difference in philosophy. But now the power over this decision will be put directly into doctors’ hands. He or she can simply refuse to sign the form. Doctors who oppose vaccine freedom of choice have been frustrated for years over this issue. Finally, they will have the power to impose their beliefs on their patients. Patients will be forced to find another doctor to sign the form, submit to vaccines, or get kicked out of public school. <br /><br />Supporters of this bill believe that all doctors will be willing to sign this form, as the signature does not imply agreement with the parent’s decision; it simply signifies that the doctor has provided the parents with information regarding the pros and cons. I disagree. I know for an absolute fact that some doctors will not sign this form out of principle or over fears of liability. <br /><br />Parents will be forced to “doctor shop” for another doctor to sign their form. This won’t be easy. Some doctors are reluctant to take new patients who don’t vaccinate. Many doctors will be unwilling to sign an exemption form for a new patient or a patient who is only there for one visit (just to get the form signed). Some doctors get financial incentives from insurance companies for having high vaccination rates into their practice; seeing patients to get their form signed will put such bonuses at risk. How many doctors will parents be expected to call? How many “no’s” will a patient need in order to be allowed into school? Natural and alternative health care providers can NOT sign the form; it must be a “regular” medical professional. Some families only see naturopathic or holistic health care practitioners instead of pediatricians. These families will have a difficult time getting the form signed. <br /><br />And what will happen to those kids who can’t get their formed signed? They will be denied entry into public school. <br /><br />The sponsors of this bill may have some good intentions, as their primary “public” reason for the bill is to make sure that parents who don’t vaccinate their children are making an informed medical decision under the guidance of their doctor. But it isn’t difficult to see the REAL reason for the bill: to increase vaccination rates in our state by making it more difficult for parents to claim the exemption. But whatever the reason, this bill will likely NOT increase vaccination rates, nor will it create closer partnerships between doctors and patients. It will create anger, financial hardship, animosity, and further mistrust in our medical system. <br /><br />For those patients who CAN find a doctor to sign their form, these “doctor-patient lectures” are not going to increase vaccination rates: Parents who are seeking a doctor’s signature have already made up their mind. The doctor isn’t going to change it during a ten minute discussion. The time for a doctor to influence parents’ opinion and trust of vaccines is during the initial well-baby checkups, years before such exemption forms even come into play. By the time a child will enter school, the parents have made up their mind to decline vaccines. A lecture from a doctor at this point won’t matter. It’s a waste of everyone’s time and money. At a time when we are trying to decrease health care spending, this bill will add millions of dollars of extra health care visits for families every year. If this unfortunate bill passes in California, the rest of the country will be soon to follow. <br /><br />And it’s a government intrusion into our personal freedom to make health care decisions for our children. <br /><br />There are numerous other objections to this bill: <br /><br />It will cost the parents, or their insurance company, more money for the extra appointments. This could cost our state millions of dollars in extra health care costs every year. We are trying to DECREASE health care spending, not increase it. <br />This bill may seem like it is designed to create a closer partnership between physician and patients. Instead, it will create more animosity between parents, doctors, and schools, amid a climate of vaccine controversy that is already volatile. <br />Be aware that the legislators who are sponsoring this bill have received campaign donations from vaccine manufacturers. <br />Enrollment in public schools may decrease, which will in turn decrease public school funding. <br /><br />SO WHAT CAN YOU DO? <br /><br />Call your California Senator and Assemblyperson now and share your opinion. Here’s an easy way. Go to <a href="http://nvicadvocacy.org/members/Resources/CAOPPOSEAB2109RestrictingVaccineExemptions.aspx">http://nvicadvocacy.org/members/Resources/CAOPPOSEAB2109RestrictingVaccineExemptions.aspx</a> and you will see a summary of the bill, numerous arguments against it, and see contact information for the members of the Assembly Committee on Health who are involved in this bill. You can also register to become a member. It’s free! – see step two below the list of the assemblypersons, or click on this link: <a href="http://nvicadvocacy.org/members/Home.aspx">http://nvicadvocacy.org/members/Home.aspx</a>. After you register, you can click on AB2109 under the Action Needed Now section. You will be given your California Senator and Assemblyperson’s contact information based on your zip code. You can then call or EMAIL to express your opinion. Thank you for joining me and many others to guard our freedom. <br /><br /><br />Dr. Bob Sears <br /><br />Author of The Vaccine Book <br /><br />TACA Physician Advisory GroupRobert Schecterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17592918924115887297noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2738066875990661293.post-52397641069987887102012-03-22T10:28:00.001-07:002012-04-02T14:27:02.718-07:00Me and the Bee<br /><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-17eL8ILJYuc/T2qalJ06_FI/AAAAAAAAAT4/kqhhLTOBsxs/s1600/1+bbbbb.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-17eL8ILJYuc/T2qalJ06_FI/AAAAAAAAAT4/kqhhLTOBsxs/s1600/1+bbbbb.jpg" /></a></div><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"></div><br />Yesterday the Sacramento Bee expressed its unbridled support for AB 2109, the misguided attempt to herd parents into a doctor's office for a vaccination propaganda session before they can obtain a philosophical exemption. This is their editorial followed by our reply. The above illustration reveals the results the confrontation.<br /><div><br /></div><div><br /><br /><div id="story_header" style="background-color: white;"><h1 class="entry-title" id="story_headline" style="color: #024a82; font-size: 26px; line-height: 1em; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"> Editorial: We all have a stake in healthy vaccination rate</h1><h2 id="story_subheadline" style="color: #777777; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 20px; line-height: 1em; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 3px;"> </h2><div class="share upper" style="float: right; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12px; margin-top: 5px;"><a href="http://www.sacbee.com/2012/03/21/4353744/we-all-have-a-stake-in-healthy.html#" id="scsharelink" style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: initial; background-image: url(http://media.sacbee.com/static/sacconnect/images/share-icon.png); background-origin: initial; background-position: 0% 50%; background-repeat: no-repeat no-repeat; color: #024a82; outline-color: initial; outline-style: initial; outline-width: 0px; padding-left: 20px; text-decoration: none;">Share</a><br /><div class="facebook_like_small" style="margin-top: 6px;"><fb:like action="like" class=" fb_edge_widget_with_comment fb_iframe_widget" colorscheme="light" font="verdana" href="http://www.sacbee.com/2012/03/21/4353744/we-all-have-a-stake-in-healthy.html#storylink=fblike" layout="button_count" show_faces="false" style="display: inline-block; position: relative;"><span style="position: relative;"><iframe class="fb_ltr" id="f2f968c" name="f2fa92f484" scrolling="no" src="http://www.facebook.com/plugins/like.php?action=like&amp;api_key=your%20app%20id&amp;channel_url=https%3A%2F%2Fs-static.ak.fbcdn.net%2Fconnect%2Fxd_proxy.php%23cb%3Dfa3f313c4%26origin%3Dhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.sacbee.com%252Ff3dfe7084%26relation%3Dparent.parent%26transport%3Dpostmessage&amp;colorscheme=light&amp;extended_social_context=false&amp;font=verdana&amp;href=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.sacbee.com%2F2012%2F03%2F21%2F4353744%2Fwe-all-have-a-stake-in-healthy.html%23storylink%3Dfblike&amp;layout=button_count&amp;locale=en_US&amp;node_type=link&amp;sdk=joey&amp;show_faces=false&amp;width=90" style="border-bottom-style: none; border-color: initial; border-color: initial; border-left-style: none; border-right-style: none; border-top-style: none; border-width: initial; border-width: initial; height: 20px; overflow-x: hidden; overflow-y: hidden; position: relative; vertical-align: text-bottom; width: 90px;" title="Like this content on Facebook."></iframe></span></fb:like></div></div><div class="pubdates" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12px; padding-bottom: 1.5em;"><div class="published" style="padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;" title="2012-03-21T00:00:00-0700">Published: Wednesday, Mar. 21, 2012 - 12:00 am | Page 10A</div></div></div><div class="lingo_region entry-content" id="articlebody" style="background-color: white; font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', Times, serif; font-size: 15px; line-height: 1.5em;"><div style="margin-bottom: 15px;">In&nbsp;<a class=" lingo_link" href="http://topics.sacbee.com/San+Diego/" rel="nofollow" style="border-bottom-color: initial; border-bottom-style: dotted; border-bottom-width: 1px; color: #024a82; cursor: pointer; display: inline; outline-color: initial; outline-style: initial; outline-width: 0px; text-decoration: none;">San Diego</a>&nbsp;in 2008, a 7-year-old boy who had not been immunized contracted measles on a trip to Switzerland and spread it to his unvaccinated siblings and then his schoolmates.</div><div style="margin-bottom: 15px;">Parents of many of those children had invoked a loosely written California law that permitted them to decline to have their children immunized based on their personal beliefs. As a result, the&nbsp;<a class=" lingo_link" href="http://topics.sacbee.com/Public+Health/" rel="nofollow" style="border-bottom-color: initial; border-bottom-style: dotted; border-bottom-width: 1px; color: #024a82; cursor: pointer; display: inline; outline-color: initial; outline-style: initial; outline-width: 0px; text-decoration: none;">public health</a>&nbsp;authorities found that 11 additional people got measles, including two infants. One had to be hospitalized.</div><div style="margin-bottom: 15px;">California's "personal belief" law must be tightened.</div><div style="margin-bottom: 15px;">Assemblyman Richard Pan, D-Sacramento, is a pediatrician who clearly understands the science behind vaccinations, and wisdom of communicating facts to parents.</div><div style="margin-bottom: 15px;">He has introduced Assembly Bill 2109, a straightforward measure that would require physicians or other qualified health care specialists to inform parents of the benefits and risks of vaccines, and to sign forms attesting that they've imparted the information. Parents who still balk at having their child immunized would need to sign forms stating that they've been told of the rewards and risks.</div><div style="margin-bottom: 15px;">Parents who fear vaccines are trying to do what they think is right. Many have read scare stories and accepted as truth false information from questionable sources. Pan said that among the most difficult fears to confront is that of autism.</div><div style="margin-bottom: 15px;">There is no link between vaccinations and autism, but fears persist. As the state&nbsp;<a class=" lingo_link lingo_link_hidden" href="http://topics.sacbee.com/Department+of+Public+Health/" rel="nofollow" style="border-bottom-style: none; border-color: initial; border-image: initial; border-left-style: none; border-right-style: none; border-top-style: none; border-width: initial; color: black; cursor: pointer; display: inline; outline-color: initial; outline-style: initial; outline-width: 0px; text-decoration: none;">Department of Public Health</a>&nbsp;points out, the&nbsp;<a class=" lingo_link" href="http://topics.sacbee.com/American+Medical+Association/" rel="nofollow" style="border-bottom-color: initial; border-bottom-style: dotted; border-bottom-width: 1px; color: #024a82; cursor: pointer; display: inline; outline-color: initial; outline-style: initial; outline-width: 0px; text-decoration: none;">American Medical Association,</a>&nbsp;<a class=" lingo_link lingo_link_hidden" href="http://topics.sacbee.com/American+Academy+of+Pediatrics/" rel="nofollow" style="border-bottom-style: none; border-color: initial; border-image: initial; border-left-style: none; border-right-style: none; border-top-style: none; border-width: initial; color: black; cursor: pointer; display: inline; outline-color: initial; outline-style: initial; outline-width: 0px; text-decoration: none;">American Academy of Pediatrics,</a>&nbsp;the Institute of Medicine and&nbsp;<a class=" lingo_link" href="http://topics.sacbee.com/World+Health+Organization/" rel="nofollow" style="border-bottom-color: initial; border-bottom-style: dotted; border-bottom-width: 1px; color: #024a82; cursor: pointer; display: inline; outline-color: initial; outline-style: initial; outline-width: 0px; text-decoration: none;">World Health Organization</a>&nbsp;all agree that there is no connection between vaccines and autism.</div><div style="margin-bottom: 15px;">Of course, vaccines have risk. But the benefits are not readily apparent because vaccines have been so successful. Polio is a rarity, thanks to vaccines. Measles is far less common that it was 45 years ago.</div><div style="margin-bottom: 15px;">Health authorities blame the 2010 pertussis epidemic in which 10 California babies died in part on under-immunization. The state has since expanded the vaccination requirement. In 2011, there were no recorded deaths attributed to pertussis, also known as whooping cough, something that had not happened since 1991.</div><div style="margin-bottom: 15px;">As it is, about 2 percent of parents opt out of having their children vaccinated. The number is rising, and is much higher at some schools.</div><div style="margin-bottom: 15px;">Health authorities become alarmed when vaccination rates fall below 85 to 90 percent. That puts all people at risk, particularly those individuals who for medical reasons cannot be immunized.</div><div style="margin-bottom: 15px;">Of all 58 California counties, Nevada County had the highest rate of parents of entering kindergartners claiming a personal belief exemption in 2010, says the state Department of Public Health. More than 17 percent of entering kindergartners in 2010 had not been vaccinated.</div><div style="margin-bottom: 15px;">In Sacramento County, 3.2 percent of entering kindergartners arrived without vaccinations in 2010 because of the parents' beliefs. In 2010, eight Sacramento County schools had opt-out rates of 20 percent or greater, all of them private or charter.</div><div style="margin-bottom: 15px;">California health officials have shown an ability to carry out effective public health campaigns. Smoking is the best example. Tobacco use has fallen dramatically since California embarked on its anti-smoking effort. The whooping cough campaign is another example. By speaking directly and honestly to parents, physicians can have huge impact.</div><div style="margin-bottom: 15px;">Pan's measure is intended to provide accurate information, and ensure that parents realize that they place their child and other parents' children at risk by failing to get their children immunized. Pan's bill deserves bipartisan support and rapid approval.</div><div style="margin-bottom: 15px;"><b>The Bee's past stands</b></div><div style="margin-bottom: 15px;">An important issue is that California has a very loose "personal belief exemption," an opt-out for parents that need not be based on religion or medical necessity. Legislators ought to revisit that law. … The bottom line: Kids need to get their vaccinations to protect us all.</div><div style="font-family: sans-serif; font-size: 10pt; height: 1px; line-height: normal; overflow-x: hidden; overflow-y: hidden; text-align: left; width: 1px;"><br />Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/2012/03/21/4353744/we-all-have-a-stake-in-healthy.html#storylink=cpy</div></div><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><span style="color: #0b5394; font-size: x-large;">Response: You have no idea what you're talking about</span><br /><div><br /></div><div><br />It's not the responsibility of children to risk their health to protect other people from generally mild illnesses.<br /><br />And whether or not the law is “loosely written" is beside the point. The law should not exist in the first place. It is not the role of government to coerce parents into medicating their children.<br /><br />Your naive faith in Dr. Pan is laughable. How does he clearly understand vaccination when his press release announcing the bill attempts to tie vaccination-exemption policy to a 2010 pertussis outbreak that was, in reality, a product of a poorly-functioning vaccine. A review emerging from the Infectious Disease Society of America confirmed: <br /><br />Pertussis Vaccine's Waning Immunity Caused California Epidemic. The…vaccine’s failure to deliver durable infection protection to children aged 7-10 years led to the 2010 California pertussis epidemic<br /><br />Your paper obviously believes that if a "public health official says something it must be true. Sad.<br /><br />Perhaps, it's not Pan's great wisdom driving this misguided bill but rather his debt to the state’s healthcare apparatus. He has received over $175,000 from big healthcare over the last two years<br /><br />And your assertion that there is no connection between autism and vaccination is odd since only one vaccine {MMR] and one vaccine ingredient [thimerosal] has ever been studied to any great extent. How do you know there is no connection? Did a public health official tell you?<br /><br />And it’s absurd that you should credit new vaccine requirements for a lack of pertussis deaths. Pertussis is a cyclical illness and manifests every three to five years - of course after a large outbreak numbers would naturally be expected to fall. We had an “outbreak” in 2005 and numbers fell naturally in subsequent years. Relying on the vested interest comprising the public health machine to make up for you ignorance is a poor recipe for journalism and explains your editorial's ridiculous conclusion favoring the harassment of parents<br /><br />As to your distress over a public health official becoming concerned realize freedom (do you know what that is?) is not to be squashed every time a public health apparatchik becomes concerned After all, it’s their job to manufacture concern; their jobs depend on it.<br /><br />Then you move on to the talking point about a decline in rates putting all people at risk. That is of course preposterous. How can it put ALL people at risk when the vast majority are vaccinated and vaccine work in most people. Besides, you cannot put someone at risk if you do not have an illness - and not vaccinating is not an illness. As such, the unvaccinated place no one at risk. After all, do those of you who have not been vaccinated against the flu this season believe that you, by simply existing, are putting your friends, family and co-workers “at risk?” Infectious illnesses have been transmitted between people since the dawn of civilization. Therefore, the decision to remain unvaccinated can only withhold potential protection from others, not put them at risk. And no one has an obligation to undergo unwanted medical treatments to provide theoretical protection to others.<br /><br />You conclude kids have to protect everyone by submitting to unwanted vaccines. But that contradicts your assertion that kids who don't vaccinate are putting others at risk. To put someone at risk you must create a risk that did not previously exist. But if a risk did not previously exist, why would they need to protect other from a non-existent risk. So which is it? Protect or put at risk?<br /><br /><br />*Editors note. Great job by our own Marlene Pitman Duke in the comments section as well.<br /><br /></div></div>Robert Schecterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17592918924115887297noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2738066875990661293.post-39314636058694419642012-03-21T09:43:00.000-07:002012-04-02T14:27:23.175-07:00Pan for Sale<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-_pB98nYuWzM/T2oEuyhJPlI/AAAAAAAAATg/xZBx5xQk15g/s1600/1+pann.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-_pB98nYuWzM/T2oEuyhJPlI/AAAAAAAAATg/xZBx5xQk15g/s1600/1+pann.jpg" /></a></div><br /><br />Richard Pan, the sponsor of the bill to herd parents into the doctors' office for a vaccine propaganda session, receives more money from so-called health professionals than from any other special interest. This is not surprising since this is the group pushing and profiting from this misguided legislation. They have purchased Pan for $175,000 over the last two years. <br /><br /><br /><a href="http://maplight.org/california/legislator/1397-richard-pan">http://maplight.org/california/legislator/1397-richard-pan</a><br /><br /><div><br /></div>Robert Schecterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17592918924115887297noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2738066875990661293.post-13807011915656623012012-03-20T10:16:00.000-07:002012-04-02T14:27:44.947-07:00California's Vaccination Indoctrination<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-aMpu5kh87Hs/T2ayI9NhqAI/AAAAAAAAATY/h6RErlPNA3E/s1600/1+cali+3.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-aMpu5kh87Hs/T2ayI9NhqAI/AAAAAAAAATY/h6RErlPNA3E/s1600/1+cali+3.jpg" /></a></div><br /><div><br /></div><br />Across America the right of parents to decide whether or not to vaccinate their children is under attack [1]. Now California families are being targeted. <br /><br />In February, Dr. Richard Pan (D-Sacramento) introduced a bill to herd parents into a doctor’s office for a lecture on vaccination before those parents would be allowed to exercise an exemption to mandated vaccinations [2]. <br /><br />The ostensible purpose of bills such as these is to provide parents “accurate” information about vaccines. Their real purpose is however to increase vaccination rates by propagandizing parents and making the exemption process more difficult. [3] <br /><br />The bill’s press release reveals the type of misinformation parents can expect to receive at one of these mandated meetings: <br /><blockquote class="tr_bq">AB 2109 Introduced as Public Health Experts Gather at Capitol to Help Prevent Repeat of California’s 2010 Epidemic</blockquote>The implication is that exemption policy had something to do with the pertussis outbreak of 2010. This is simply false; there is no scientific evidence to support a connection. <br /><br />A review emerging from the Infectious Disease Society of America confirmed: [4]<br /><blockquote class="tr_bq">Pertussis Vaccine's Waning Immunity Caused California Epidemic. The…vaccine’s failure to deliver durable infection protection to children aged 7-10 years led to the 2010 California pertussis epidemic </blockquote>Besides, according to the <a href="http://www.cdph.ca.gov/programs/immunize/Documents/HowisCA%2803_10%29.pdf">California State Department of Health</a>, as of March 2010:<br /><blockquote class="tr_bq">Vaccination coverage in California is at or near all-time high levels [5] </blockquote>The AB2109 press release also reveals a troubling relationship between this bill and a shadowy organization called the California Immunization Coalition. The CIC is an entity comprised of every vaccine-related vested interest imaginable. [6] The group’s dedication is not to accurate information but rather unbridled vaccination. Their web address immunizeca.org says it all. <br /><br />In 2011 they were the driving force behind Teen Vaccine Week: an “observance” where the group encouraged teachers to engage their students in herd immunity propaganda sessions, the playing of Vaccine Jeopardy (like the TV show) and vaccine-related scavenger hunts. [7] <br /><br />Is this the group who will be tasked with deciding what’s “accurate?” Will they ensure that we get, as their president Jeff Goad, called it “the right” information? [8] <br /><br />And why are they so anxious to get us into the doctor’s office to address a non-problem anyway? For years the vaccine promoters have been studying parents to find out what “communication” techniques and talking points to apply in order to make us more malleable to the vaccine proposition. [9]Noted spin doctors have been employed and have concluded that fostering vaccine demand “requires creating concern, anxiety, and worry.” [10] <br /><br />But how do you create fear of mild illnesses while at the same time using accurate information? The answer is you don’t. <br /><br />Besides, are doctors even providing accurate information in the first place? Based on my experience, the answer is no. For example Dr. Paul Offit, a vaccine industry luminary, is, when discussing the risks posed by vaccine-preventable illnesses, often wildly off base. He claims that, in the pre-vaccine era (the late 50s and early 60s) measles-related deaths numbered 3,000. In reality, according to the CDC [11] and others, deaths numbered only ~450.<br /><br />Then there’s Dr. Glenn D. Braunstein, of Cedars-Sinai who, in a 2010 Huffington Post piece, asserted that vaccination wiped out typhoid [12] when in reality a vaccine had nothing to do with its demise.[13] <br /><br />Finally we have TV’s Dr. Nancy Snyderman. In February 2010 on MSNBC’s Morning Joe, she claimed:<br /><br />Right now we have children dying in the United States of America from measles, mumps… [14] <br /><br />In reality, no such deaths were occurring. <br /><br />Is this the type of “reliable” information parents can expect to hear when dragged before the experts? <br /><br />And since the purpose is to increase vaccine rates do you think doctors will tell parents that mortality from these illnesses was in virtual free fall long before the advent of vaccination? [15] It’s more likely parents will have to listen to the fallacious talking point that unvaccinated children “put the entire community at risk.” [16] This is of course laughably ridiculous. Here’s why. <br /><br />The vast majority of people in America are protected by the vaccines they’ve already received. Besides, you cannot put someone at risk if you do not have an illness - and not vaccinating is not an illness. After all, do those of you who’ve declined this year’s flu shot believe that you, by simply existing, are putting friends, family and co-workers “at risk?” Of course not. <br /><br />One would have to engage in a willful suspension of disbelief to imagine an accurate representation of the vaccine issue to emerge from a program designed by a consortium of vaccination-related vested interests. Yet despite a lack of popular demand for this type of legislation, we have, staring us in the face and threatening to become law, this egregious bill designed to strip parental rights simply because a few parents have chosen to exercise those rights. <br /><br />And while not all of you may be worried about this specific issue, it’s important to remember that if parents lose the freedom to decide, without state involvement, what medical treatments their children will receive, what’s going to stop them from one day coming after you and the freedoms about which you care?<br /><br /><br />If you live in California, use the following link to contact your representative and demand your vaccine rights!<br /><a href="http://nvicadvocacy.org/members/Resources/CAOPPOSEAB2109RestrictingVaccineExemptions.aspx">http://nvicadvocacy.org/members/Resources/CAOPPOSEAB2109RestrictingVaccineExemptions.aspx</a> <br /><br /><br /><br />One <br /><a href="http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/local/articles/2012/02/28/20120228child-vaccine-proponents-urge-stronger-arizona-legislation.html">http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/local/articles/2012/02/28/20120228child-vaccine-proponents-urge-stronger-arizona-legislation.html</a> <br /><br />Two <br /><a href="http://asmdc.org/members/a05/newsroom/press-releases/item/2766-dr-pan-introduces-bill-to-provide-parents-immunization-information-to-prevent-outbreaks">http://asmdc.org/members/a05/newsroom/press-releases/item/2766-dr-pan-introduces-bill-to-provide-parents-immunization-information-to-prevent-outbreaks</a> <br /><br />Three <br /><a href="http://www.issaquahpress.com/2011/09/20/state-has-poor-record-for-student-immunizations-high-rate-of-exemptions/">http://www.issaquahpress.com/2011/09/20/state-has-poor-record-for-student-immunizations-high-rate-of-exemptions/</a> <br /><br />Four <br /><a href="http://www.internalmedicinenews.com/news/conference-news/infectious-diseases-society-of-america-conference/single-article/acellular-pertussis-vaccine-s-waning-immunity-caused-california-epidemic/71de9826f4.html">http://www.internalmedicinenews.com/news/conference-news/infectious-diseases-society-of-america-conference/single-article/acellular-pertussis-vaccine-s-waning-immunity-caused-california-epidemic/71de9826f4.html</a> <br /><br />Five <br /><a href="http://www.cdph.ca.gov/programs/immunize/Documents/HowisCA%2803_10%29.pdf">http://www.cdph.ca.gov/programs/immunize/Documents/HowisCA(03_10).pdf</a> <br /><br />Six <br /><a href="http://www.immunizeca.org/about/advisory-council">http://www.immunizeca.org/about/advisory-council</a> <br /><br /><a href="http://www.immunizeca.org/about/board-of-directors">http://www.immunizeca.org/about/board-of-directors</a> <br /><br />Seven <br /><a href="http://www.cdph.ca.gov/programs/immunize/Pages/PreteenVaccineWeek.aspx">http://www.cdph.ca.gov/programs/immunize/Pages/PreteenVaccineWeek.aspx</a> <br /><br />Eight <br /><a href="http://asmdc.org/members/a05/newsroom/press-releases/item/2766-dr-pan-introduces-bill-to-provide-parents-immunization-information-to-prevent-outbreaks">http://asmdc.org/members/a05/newsroom/press-releases/item/2766-dr-pan-introduces-bill-to-provide-parents-immunization-information-to-prevent-outbreaks</a> <br /><br />Nine <br /><a href="http://archive.hhs.gov/nvpo/pubs/vcwsummary.pdf">http://archive.hhs.gov/nvpo/pubs/vcwsummary.pdf</a> <br /><br /><a href="http://www.vdh.state.va.us/clinicians/pdf/vaccinations.pdf">http://www.vdh.state.va.us/clinicians/pdf/vaccinations.pdf</a> <br /><br />Ten <br /><a href="http://www.iom.edu/%7E/media/Files/Activity%20Files/PublicHealth/MicrobialThreats/Nowak.pdf">http://www.iom.edu/~/media/Files/Activity%20Files/PublicHealth/MicrobialThreats/Nowak.pdf</a> <br /><br />Eleven <br /><a href="http://www.cdc.gov/measles/about/overview.html">http://www.cdc.gov/measles/about/overview.html</a> <br /><br />Tweleve <br /><a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/glenn-d-braunstein-md/vaccinations-still-amazin_b_481523.html">http://www.huffingtonpost.com/glenn-d-braunstein-md/vaccinations-still-amazin_b_481523.html</a> <br /><br />Thirteen <br />According to the textbook Vaccines (4th edition pages 1060-61): <br /><br />The highest incidence usually occurs where water supplies serving large populations are contaminated by fecal matter. This situation existed at the end of the 19th century in most large cities in the United States...causing the disease to be highly endemic in large cities. With the introduction of water treatment at the turn of the 20th century...the incidence of typhoid plummeted precipitously in the large cities of the united states <br /><br />And according to Arthur Allen, a great friend of vaccination and the author of Vaccine: The controversial Story of Medicine's Greatest Lifesaver: <br /><br />Nationwide, the typhoid death rate declined 99 percent from 1906 to 1936, with little vaccination. P 137 <br /><br />Fourteen <br /><a href="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3036789/vp/35406458#35406458">http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3036789/vp/35406458#35406458</a> <br /><br />Fifteen <br /><a href="http://insidevaccines.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/us-deaths-1900-1965.jpg">http://insidevaccines.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/us-deaths-1900-1965.jpg</a> <br /><br />Sixteen <br /><a href="http://health.usnews.com/health-news/family-health/infectious-diseases/articles/2010/03/22/measles-outbreak-triggered-by-unvaccinated-child">http://health.usnews.com/health-news/family-health/infectious-diseases/articles/2010/03/22/measles-outbreak-triggered-by-unvaccinated-child</a> <br /><br /><a href="http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/local/articles/2012/02/28/20120228child-vaccine-proponents-urge-stronger-arizona-legislation.html">http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/local/articles/2012/02/28/20120228child-vaccine-proponents-urge-stronger-arizona-legislation.html</a> <br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br />*Paul Offit’s assertion regarding the measles appears on page 56 of his book VaccinesRobert Schecterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17592918924115887297noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2738066875990661293.post-4502156037172512542012-03-15T10:10:00.000-07:002012-04-02T14:28:07.511-07:00West Virginia Parents Take On the Machine<div style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: 'lucida grande',tahoma,verdana,arial,sans-serif; font-size: x-small;"><span style="line-height: 16px;"><br /></span></span></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-MONtgJZmPyw/T2Ih_ouYVeI/AAAAAAAAATM/Wk7R7AGMinE/s1600/1+this+just.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-MONtgJZmPyw/T2Ih_ouYVeI/AAAAAAAAATM/Wk7R7AGMinE/s1600/1+this+just.jpg" /></a></div><span style="background-color: white; font-family: 'lucida grande',tahoma,verdana,arial,sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: 16px; text-align: left;"><br /></span><br /><span style="background-color: white; font-family: 'lucida grande',tahoma,verdana,arial,sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: 16px; text-align: left;">This is from <a href="http://www.wetheparents.info/">We the Parents</a> a group fighting for vaccine choice in West Virginia.</span><br /><span style="background-color: white; font-family: 'lucida grande',tahoma,verdana,arial,sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: 16px; text-align: left;"><br /></span><br /><span style="background-color: white; font-family: 'lucida grande',tahoma,verdana,arial,sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: 16px; text-align: left;">BREAKING NEWS!!!</span><br /><br /><span style="background-color: white; font-family: 'lucida grande',tahoma,verdana,arial,sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: 16px; text-align: left;">WEST VIRGINIA SENATORS DENY PARENTS DUE PROCESS</span><br /><span style="background-color: white; font-family: 'lucida grande',tahoma,verdana,arial,sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: 16px; text-align: left;">Parents Ignored, Placated, and Insulted by West Virginia’s Legislature</span><br /><br /><span style="background-color: white; font-family: 'lucida grande',tahoma,verdana,arial,sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: 16px; text-align: left;">Senator Ron Stollings, a medical doctor in the West Virginia Legislature, made several statements in a February 22, 2012 WOWKTV interview. He is quoted as saying, “states with vaccine exemptions have higher rates of diseases like measles, mumps and diphtheria.” He adds “kids who are not vaccinated could put kids at risk who are.” Both blanket statements are simply untrue and perpetuate unrealistic fears. Senator Stollings goes on to say, that he “is working on a study resolution that he and other senators plan to introduce in the Education Committee. The study would last a year and show both sides of the vaccination issue in hopes of ending the issue in the state.” Parents across the state were pleased with the reasonable efforts the Senate appeared to be taking, and were assured that the issue would be given attention throughout the year during Senate Interim Committee meetings.&nbsp;</span><br /><br /><span style="background-color: white; font-family: 'lucida grande',tahoma,verdana,arial,sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: 16px; text-align: left;">Although the need for non-medical exemptions regarding childhood immunization, as 48 other states provide, was brought to the legislative forefront in the in the form of Senate Bill 50 on the first day of the 2012 Legislative Session, many ranking Senate members drug out the legislative process in order to not deal with citizens’ demands. Senator Plymale, chair of the Senate Education Committee, where the bill began, refused to answer the emails, phone calls, or faxes from over 100 parents asking for help in ending mandated healthcare for our children.&nbsp;</span><br /><span style="background-color: white; font-family: 'lucida grande',tahoma,verdana,arial,sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: 16px; text-align: left;">Only after over 200 parents rallied on the Capitol steps on February 22, 2012, demanding their voice be heard and demanding their Constitutional rights, did Senator Stollings promise a “study” in a quote to WOWKTV. However, Senator Stollings also ignored phone calls, emails, and faxes from parents for nearly two months. And in the end, all of the stall tactics worked. Although the Senate did vote for the issue to be studied during the interim sessions, the House received the “study resolution” late in the day of the last day of the 2012 Legislative Session and were not given an opportunity to vote on the measure.&nbsp;</span><br /><br /><span style="background-color: white; font-family: 'lucida grande',tahoma,verdana,arial,sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: 16px; text-align: left;">If Senator Stollings’ goal is to end the issue (of forced immunization) in the state, as he was quoted, he will not be pleased with the backlash which is brewing. Parents suffering as a result of current unconstitutional, antiquated law who were ignored, placated, and treated with complete disrespect are rallying vigorously and planning a larger grassroots movement in the coming months.</span><br /><br /><span style="background-color: white; font-family: 'lucida grande',tahoma,verdana,arial,sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: 16px; text-align: left;">The grassroots movement, We the Parents, has enjoyed favorable press, especially on a national level, and will continue to get the word out on all levels. In addition, expect billboards, radio interviews, rallies, documentary viewings, and major media saturation on local levels specific to West Virginia counties. The movement includes parents, professionals, churches, veterans, and is growing by leaps and bounds, and they are committed to the goal of ensuring that Mountaineers are indeed always free.&nbsp;</span><br /><br /><span style="background-color: white; font-family: 'lucida grande',tahoma,verdana,arial,sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: 16px; text-align: left;">##########################</span><br /><span style="background-color: white; font-family: 'lucida grande',tahoma,verdana,arial,sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: 16px; text-align: left;">For more information, visit&nbsp;</span><a href="http://www.wetheparents.info/" rel="nofollow nofollow" style="background-color: white; color: #3b5998; cursor: pointer; font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: 16px; text-align: left; text-decoration: none;" target="_blank">www.wetheparents.info</a><span style="background-color: white; font-family: 'lucida grande',tahoma,verdana,arial,sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: 16px; text-align: left;">&nbsp;or contact Lori Lee at (304) 532-5412 or email at info@blueroseholistics.com.</span>Robert Schecterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17592918924115887297noreply@blogger.com6tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2738066875990661293.post-78975628215194714292012-03-14T11:58:00.000-07:002012-04-02T14:28:30.581-07:00Exemptions under Attack<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-lBPwf-rFiyk/T2DpzJdyMoI/AAAAAAAAAS8/Wuz-WRoCEuM/s1600/1+vmt.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-lBPwf-rFiyk/T2DpzJdyMoI/AAAAAAAAAS8/Wuz-WRoCEuM/s1600/1+vmt.jpg" /></a></div><br /><br />Vaccine exemptions under attack in Vermont. Check out our new&nbsp;<a href="http://www.ageofautism.com/2012/03/vermont-seeks-to-terminate-parental-vaccination-rights-.html?utm_source=feedburner&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=Feed%3A+ageofautism+%28AGE+OF+AUTISM%29&amp;utm_content=My+Yahoo">Age of Autism</a>&nbsp;post on the issue.<br /><div><br /></div>Robert Schecterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17592918924115887297noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2738066875990661293.post-39519021912661824012012-02-29T17:52:00.001-08:002012-04-02T14:33:18.320-07:00Vaccines: Eww, Seriously, So Gross!<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-bsTONj5s5uo/T07XtWhsZgI/AAAAAAAAASs/0rXihRqzVx4/s1600/1+so+gross.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-bsTONj5s5uo/T07XtWhsZgI/AAAAAAAAASs/0rXihRqzVx4/s1600/1+so+gross.jpg" /></a></div><br /><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div><br /><br /><br /></div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div>Robert Schecterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17592918924115887297noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2738066875990661293.post-29212530920707976812012-02-27T21:58:00.001-08:002012-04-02T14:36:23.236-07:00Quitter<div class="separator tr_bq" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="separator tr_bq" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="separator tr_bq" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-XH5qJ_wX_tQ/T0xnx24bW3I/AAAAAAAAASM/LWRF-3GfJzE/s1600/1+quit.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-XH5qJ_wX_tQ/T0xnx24bW3I/AAAAAAAAASM/LWRF-3GfJzE/s320/1+quit.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><br /><br /><br /><br />The vaccination brochure known as Forbes.com ran<a href="http://www.forbes.com/sites/stevensalzberg/2012/02/25/should-doctors-fire-anti-vaccine/"> this silly piece</a> on doctors firing patients declining vaccines. Since my comments have been in moderation (or whatever vaccination.com calls it) for twelve hours, I've decided to share them here:<br /><br /><blockquote>Doctors can't "fire" patients because they didn't hire them. All doctors can do is quit. And as more doctors quit, more parents will realize they were unnecessary in the first place. Childhood is not an illness and as such should not be spent in the doctor's office. Yes, kids will no longer get unnecessary antibiotics for conditions for which those drugs are ineffective, but hey, that's just the price they'll have to pay. And I wonder, are these docs "firing" families in which the parents are not up to date as well? They too could “endanger” kids in the waiting room. Perhaps we'll have to wait for the adult-vaccine push to progress further to hear that talking point emerge.<br /><br />So quit away. We'll learn to live without the unnecessary and overdone well-baby visits - a brilliant ritual in which the healthy are brought into contact with the ill and infirmed. And we'll learn to weigh and measure our kids without your help.</blockquote><blockquote class="tr_bq"><br /></blockquote>Robert Schecterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17592918924115887297noreply@blogger.com5tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2738066875990661293.post-37310736986954914502012-02-17T10:05:00.000-08:002012-02-17T10:17:35.406-08:00Little Miss Mandates<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-TTFfsHaOqbE/Tz6O8_SW4cI/AAAAAAAAASA/OTTwWI40IEU/s1600/1+dyke.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-TTFfsHaOqbE/Tz6O8_SW4cI/AAAAAAAAASA/OTTwWI40IEU/s1600/1+dyke.jpg" /></a></div><br /><br /><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="line-height: 115%;">A couple of days ago, courtesy of some friends over at Facebook, I discovered a <a href="http://www.slate.com/blogs/xx_factor/2012/02/13/anti_vaccination_attitudes_percolate_amongst_those_with_superiority_fetishes_.html">pro-vaccine rant</a><span style="font-size: small;"> posted at Salon.com written by a&nbsp;</span></span>one Amanda Marcotte entitled The Superiority Complex of Vaccination Foes. Mar<span style="border-bottom-color: windowtext; border-bottom-style: none; border-bottom-width: 1pt; border-image: initial; border-left-color: windowtext; border-left-style: none; border-left-width: 1pt; border-right-color: windowtext; border-right-style: none; border-right-width: 1pt; border-top-color: windowtext; border-top-style: none; border-top-width: 1pt; line-height: 115%; padding-bottom: 0in; padding-left: 0in; padding-right: 0in; padding-top: 0in;">cotte, </span><span style="line-height: 115%;">a self-avowed, progressive (a collectivist ideology advancing the notion of an all-powerful state) attacks anyone having the temerity to challenge the wisdom of America’s absurd vaccination policy while at the same disparaging those believing in God. She begins:</span></span></div><h3 style="background: white; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0in;"> <span style="font-family: inherit; font-size: small; font-weight: normal;"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></h3><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;"><span style="font-family: inherit; line-height: 115%;">Unlike with most anti-vaccination situations, the objections aren't coming from people whose faith in organic foods purchased at yuppie-tested enviroments are better disease prevention than vaccines, but from people returning to Old Faithful, the God card. <o:p></o:p></span><br /><span style="font-family: inherit; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit; line-height: 115%;">Oh those vaccine zealots. They imagine their precious little miracles to be threatened at every turn. Anyone who even desires a choice as to what medical treatments are administered to their healthy children is labeled anti-vaccine. As if vaccines were such a marvel, no rational person could ever oppose them. Sadly, for the public health communities and their statist supporters, vaccines are hardly miracles. They protect against largely mild illnesses* whose ability to cause death or serious injury was falling precipitously before the practice became widespread – this because contributory lifestyle factors almost always determine the progression of an illness.<o:p></o:p></span><br /><span style="font-family: inherit; line-height: 18px;"><br /></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit; line-height: 115%;">As to her attacks on those worshiping God, perhaps it is because she thinks we should all really be worshiping the government and its minions in public health. <o:p></o:p></span><br /><span style="font-family: inherit; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: white; line-height: 18px; text-align: left;">And finally notice how she employs</span><span style="line-height: 115%;">&nbsp;the shopworn talking point about vaccine disinterest among yuppies (young urban professionals who ostensibly are well-educated) . She apparently favors a world like the one described by Orwell in the book 1984, in which obedience is the norm and “ignorance is strength.”</span></span><br /><span style="font-family: inherit; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit; line-height: 115%;">Continuing&nbsp;<i><span style="border-bottom-color: windowtext; border-bottom-style: none; border-bottom-width: 1pt; border-image: initial; border-left-color: windowtext; border-left-style: none; border-left-width: 1pt; border-right-color: windowtext; border-right-style: none; border-right-width: 1pt; border-top-color: windowtext; border-top-style: none; border-top-width: 1pt; padding-bottom: 0in; padding-left: 0in; padding-right: 0in; padding-top: 0in;">Marcotte</span></i> states:<o:p></o:p></span><br /><span style="font-family: inherit; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;"><span style="font-family: inherit; line-height: 115%;">Obviously, this is not about children's rights. The children's rights are being violated by their parents, who believe their right to use their children as symbols to prove their piety trumps their children's right to health. <o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span><br /><span style="font-family: inherit; line-height: 115%;">She seems painfully unaware that in free countries parents have the right to raise their children as they see fit - unless an action or non-action places those children at risk of serious harm. Not getting vaccinated in no way reaches that threshold. In fact, based on all the mistakes of the past involving vaccination, the procedure’s unknown effects on a child’s developing immune system and the acknowledged side effects many children must endure, one could successfully argue that it is the lifetime of vaccination from which the child needs to be protected. <o:p></o:p></span><br /><span style="font-family: inherit; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit; line-height: 115%;">Then pretending to possess an understanding of “rights,” she declares:<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><blockquote class="tr_bq"><span style="font-family: inherit; line-height: 115%;">Of course, we live in an environment where conservatives are claiming that it's a violation of "religious liberty" if you can't force your beliefs on others. The degradation of understanding of what a right is and who has it is one that historians of early 21st century America will find fascinating, I'm sure.</span></blockquote><span style="font-family: inherit; line-height: 115%;">Apparently, the only rights she recognizes are those allowing the state to initiate threats and violence against innocent individuals in order to further her collectivist agenda.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit; line-height: 115%;"><br />Progressive nuts such as <span style="border-bottom-color: windowtext; border-bottom-style: none; border-bottom-width: 1pt; border-image: initial; border-left-color: windowtext; border-left-style: none; border-left-width: 1pt; border-right-color: windowtext; border-right-style: none; border-right-width: 1pt; border-top-color: windowtext; border-top-style: none; border-top-width: 1pt; padding-bottom: 0in; padding-left: 0in; padding-right: 0in; padding-top: 0in;">Marcotte</span>want the state to be in charge of our health because they want the state to be in charge of us. As such, the decision to medicate us is theirs, not our own. In a world where the government exists to care for us, there is nothing the mommy state cannot do. Sadly supporters of the failed collectivists and progressives ideologies such as Marcotte have little respect for real rights, especially the foundational one: the right to liberty. For them true rights are simply obstacles to the deluded notion that they could ever realize their utopian fantasies.<br />&nbsp;<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit; line-height: 115%;">Rambling on she arrives at the topic of anti-vaccine “fanatics”:<br /><br /><o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;"><span style="font-family: inherit; line-height: 115%;">What's interesting here is how revealing this whole situation is of the psychological baggage that leads a person to become an anti-vaccination fanatic. <o:p></o:p></span><br /><span style="font-family: inherit; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit; line-height: 115%;">Marcotte fails to comprehend the real fanatics are the public health do-gooders running around chasing a few cases of mild illnesses such as the measles in order to justify their feeding off the productive, taxpaying members of society. Their baggage requires them to deceive themselves with the delusionary notion that they, by preventing a few cases of the mumps or chickenpox are somehow heroic lifesavers and guardians of America’s children. Talk about psychological baggage. <o:p></o:p></span><br /><span style="font-family: inherit; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="line-height: 115%;">She then appeals to egalitarianism (another far-left ideology in which the state has to force everyone to be equal and the identical by whatever means necessary) in her defense of America’s indefensible compulsory vaccination policy while using the childlike argument that if an injustice is already being perpetrated against another, it must be OK.</span><span style="line-height: 115%;"><br /></span></span><br /><blockquote class="tr_bq"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="line-height: 115%;">Whether it's because you think God loves you best or because you think your dedication to organic produce confers magical health benefits, the underlying sentiment of anti-vaccination believers is that they and theirs are special, and shouldn't be subject to the unclean health practices of the common folk.&nbsp;</span><span style="line-height: 115%;">Vaccination is just too democratic a practice. Rich and poor, black and white, Christian or not: we all have to sit in the same chair while the same nurse pokes us with the same batch of drugs. They don't even have special needles for the better class of person getting a vaccination. Getting vaccinated is to health care like taking the bus is to transportation. The very act of it insinuates that your special snowflake of a child could become infected with germs that come from someone else's totally-not-special kid</span></span></blockquote></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span><br /><span style="font-family: inherit; line-height: 115%;">It’s not surprising the author would deride those seeing themselves as individuals and not objects of state control.<o:p></o:p></span><br /><span style="font-family: inherit; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit; line-height: 115%;">The idea that each child is special (I don’t know where the snowflake part comes in but I’ve been seeing it used extensively in the “skeptical” community recently) is anathema to those who would have us live in a hive or in a herd. The dream of Marcotte and those like her has us living as a nation of medicated, homogenized, collectivized, indoctrinated, compliant sheep. To those of us who value freedom, Marcotte's dream is a nightmare and it's one that has been going on for far too long. Time to wake up, America.</span><br /><span style="font-family: inherit; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span><br /><span style="line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /><br /><br /><br /><br />*Or they protect against illnesses for which most of us are not at risk. For example hepatitis B.</span><br /><br /><br /><span style="font-family: 'Courier New'; font-size: 12pt;"><o:p></o:p></span></span></div>Robert Schecterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17592918924115887297noreply@blogger.com6tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2738066875990661293.post-62144885628897183232012-02-14T10:15:00.000-08:002012-02-15T13:45:39.705-08:00A Few Shots Against Hypocrisy.<br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-Bjy5YZzzAzY/Tzqj6jwTgCI/AAAAAAAAAR4/lmk69mzwRnE/s1600/1+dobya.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-Bjy5YZzzAzY/Tzqj6jwTgCI/AAAAAAAAAR4/lmk69mzwRnE/s1600/1+dobya.jpg" /></a></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /><br /><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="color: #010101;"><span style="line-height: 115%;">Today we have a guest post&nbsp;</span></span><span style="color: #010101;"><span style="line-height: 18px;">courtesy of Anonymous.</span></span><br /><br /><span style="color: #010101;"><span style="line-height: 115%;">Legislators nationwide are voting to protect children against infectious illness by turning down expanded exemptions, blocking new exemptions and adding burdensome requirements to current exemptions. See <a href="http://www.facebook.com/l/5AQHGK4rxAQGL-AEL93wViymSpBqLhKkJJR0sSF1hMP-V6w/rapidcityjournal.com/news/bills-offering-vaccination-opt-out-fail/article_46a1b9aa-5210-11e1">South Dakota</a>, <a href="http://www.facebook.com/l/UAQEipeCtAQGIVz2rclGPONZiMoo4NBO56sKhyX3Pn3-N2w/seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2015219437_apwavaccinationrates1stldwritethru.html">Washington State</a>, <a href="http://www.facebook.com/l/TAQFSRqHVAQGBVNUuosz6HwdDTod1QO-1FxyxJaTMeHN1bw/www.newsandsentinel.com/page/content.detail/id/557033/Vaccination-bill-stirs-debate.html?nav=5061">West Virginia</a>, <a href="http://www.facebook.com/l/SAQEeiqUWAQEF7MKvKyY35bq6gLkd8ViGgjRUamZUoUo6wQ/www.azleg.gov/DocumentsForBill.asp?Bill_Number=HB2846&amp;Session_ID=107">Arizona</a> and <a href="http://www.facebook.com/l/SAQEeiqUWAQGHUHK-HCPB3HAXEMu4u9yEKwgdcE2APiHG2w/www.burlingtonfreepress.com/article/20120116/NEWS03/201160307/Vermont-lawmakers-try-boost-vaccination-rates">Vermont</a>.</span></span><br /><br /><span style="color: #010101;"><span style="line-height: 115%;">There is even a<a href="http://www.facebook.com/l/oAQFoImN9AQGoQwJJU1BG7VqB1dH108PcuBjZ8qWO4QHmkw/www.vaccinesafety.edu/DraftExemption.htm"> model draft exemption law</a> being passed around to legislators to save them the trouble of writing their own.</span></span><br /><br /><span style="color: #010101;"><span style="line-height: 115%;">We think the legislators are absolutely right to act to protect children against infectious diseases, but they are overlooking a major disease vector: themselves. Legislators work in crowded conditions, especially state legislators. They conduct hearings in small hearing rooms filled with people, in old buildings with inadequate air circulation. They shake hands. They even kiss babies. Looking at all 50 state legislatures, millions of people visit these buildings every year including busloads of school children.</span></span><br /><br /><span style="color: #010101;"><span style="line-height: 115%;">We propose that legislatures end the hypocrisy of mandating lots and lots of vaccines to babies and children while ignoring their own role as germ magnets and get on board with the <a href="http://www.facebook.com/l/UAQEipeCtAQHWEreZQyJZMwh5yAmQqabwXWNJ7obA3r-b2A/www.cdc.gov/vaccines/recs/schedules/downloads/adult/adult-schedule.pdf">CDC vaccine schedule for adults</a>. Since the medical profession is okay with giving even premature babies several vaccines at once, there is no reason that an adult legislator couldn’t do the entire recommended schedule (taking into account gender and age) at one doctor visit.</span></span><br /><br /><span style="color: #010101;"><span style="line-height: 115%;">No, we aren’t talking about volunteering for these vaccines. Vaccines for legislators should be mandatory. Whatever exemption laws are currently in place should apply, so if parents need to get a doctor to sign off on an exemption, the legislator should have to get a doctor to sign off on an exemption. The usual rules for medical exemptions will apply. First you get the vaccines. If you react badly, you tell your doctor. If you can convince your doctor that the vaccine caused the reaction (good luck) and if you can convince the doctor that the reaction was serious enough to preclude more vaccinations (good luck), and if you can convince the doctor to actually sign the medical exemption form and (in some states) the health department to sign off on the form, then you can be exempted from the vaccine which caused the reaction. Only, of course, since you got a whole pile of vaccines at one time neither your nor the doctor have any idea which vaccine did it. Tough.</span></span><br /><br /><span style="color: #010101;"><span style="line-height: 115%;">Obviously these mandates should also apply to everyone working in state health departments, from the janitor to the chief. They should be applied to every doctor or pharmacist who testifies in favor of vaccine mandates. Everyone who testifies in favor of forced vaccination should be vaccinated. Obvious, right?</span></span><br /><br /><span style="color: #010101;"><span style="line-height: 115%;">Lobbyists, too, need to get their shots. All that handshaking…</span></span><br /><br /><span style="color: #010101;"><span style="line-height: 115%;">And governors.</span></span><br /><br /><span style="color: #010101;"><span style="line-height: 115%;">And I’m sure that everyone at the Centers for Disease Control is up to date on every possible vaccination.</span></span><br /><br /><span style="color: #010101;"><span style="line-height: 115%;">Get on it folks!<br /></span></span></span><br /><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="color: #010101;"><span style="line-height: 115%;"><br /></span></span></span><span style="font-family: 'Courier New'; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>Robert Schecterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17592918924115887297noreply@blogger.com4